Google This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the world's books discoverable online. It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the publisher to a library and finally to you. Usage guidelines Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. We also ask that you: + Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes. + Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. + Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. + Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe. About Google Book Search Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web at|http: //books .google .com/I ,.db,Googlc "BT ,db,Googlc ,.db,Googlc ,.db,Googlc D,j.,.db,Googlc A MANUAL OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMAS Volume I THE DEVELOPMENT OF DOGMAS DURING THE PATRISTIC AGE, 100-869 REV. BERNARD J.° OTTEN, S. J. ntOFTOOK OF DOCHATIC THBOLOOY AKD TSB HUTOKT OP DOCUM IT. LOtlU DHtVBUITY THIRD EDITION a HERDER 17 South Bkoadway, St. Louis, Mo. 68 Grut Russell St., London, W. C. 1923 DigiLizedbyGoOglc IMPRTMI POTEST Alexander J. Burrowts, SJ. Praep. Prov. iHssour. Sti. Ludoviei, die 6 Jan. W7- NIHIL OBSTAT Sti. Ludovki, die iS Wait, IW- P. G. Holvstcb, Censor Librontm IMPRIMATUK Sti. Ludoviei. die 18 Maii, I9S7- •i-Joannes J. Glennon. Archiepiseopus Sti. Ludoviei Copyright, 1917 by Josepft Gianmershaeh All rights reserved Printed in U. S. A. DigiLizedbyGoOglc FOREWORD The purpose of the present book is indicated by its title — A Manual of the History of Dogmas. The work strives to present as briefly as the subject matter permits what is usually dwelt upon at length by the Professor of the History of Dogmas in his dass-lectures. It is intended primarily for ecclesiastical students, who follow a course of lectures on this important subject ; but it is expected to provide useful reading for those others also, and they surely are many, who are inter- ested in the matter of Doctrinal Development. In the author's c^inion the crying need there is of a compendious History of Dogmas amply justifles the book's publication. No Manual of this kind has as yet appeared in English. It is true, the first three volumes of Tixeront's excellent work in French have been issued in an English translation, but that work is too voluminous to serve as a handbook. Hence the need of a com- pendious History of Dogmas still remains, and to supply this need the author offers the present Manual. Feast of the Holy Name, 1917. DigiLizedbyGoOglc FOREWORD TO THE SECOND EDITION The reviews of this Manual have been so uniformly favor- able, and so very few improvements have been suggested, that the author considers himself justified in issuing this second edition merely as a reprint of the first, correcting, however, such typographical errors as a careful reading enabled him to detect. The three or four improvements that were kindly sug- gested called for a fuller development of some particular topics, such as " Penance in the Early Church," " the Origin of the Hierarchy," and " the Primacy of Rome." The suggestions have been carefully considered, and the author intends to act on them in a future edition, vfhen a few other points also will be further developed. Feast of the Assumption, igaa DigiLizedbyGoOglc TABLE OF CONTENTS FoBzwoBD iii BlBUOGSAFHY xi INTRODUCTION DOGKA AND THB HlSTORV OP DOGKAS I CHAPTER I Social and Religious Condition of the Gentile World at THE Tike of the Fiest Preaching of the Gospel . , $ A-^Social Conditions 6 B — The State of Religion 7 CHAPTER II ISRAKL AMD 1X3 RELATION TO CHRISTIANITY l8 A — The Palestinian Jews: Their Messianic Hopes ... 19 B— The Jews of the Dispersion: Their Religious and Philo- sophical Views 30 CHAPTER III Nsw Testauent Teaching on the Fundauental Truths of Christianity 35 A — Christ's Teaching on the Kingdom of Heaven • ■ ■ • 35 B— The Life Eternal 39 C — Sl Paul's Doctrine 00 the Church of Christ 41 D — The Blessed Trinity and the Person of Christ .... 44 CHAPTER IV Chustiah Life ik Apostolic Tiues; First Appearance of 5» DigiLizedbyGoOglc vi .CONTENTS CHAPTER V ^^ The Writings and Teaching of the Apostouc Fathers . . 62 A — The Writings of the Apostolic Fathers 62 B — Teaching of the Apostolic Fathers 69 CHAPTER VI Heretical TENnENaES^ND Pagan Opposition to Christianity During the Second Century 99 A — Gnosticism: Various Systems: Influence on Christian Thought 101 B — Millennarianism 105 C — Pagan Opposition 107 CHAPTER Vn Second-Centusy Apologists and Their Literary Activities no A — Defense of Christian Morals : Christianity and Philosophy 1 13 B — Eiqrasition of Christian Doctrine 115 CHAPTER VIII The Teaching or St. Irehxus and St. Hippolytus .... 138 CHAPTER IX Monarchiak Aberrations and Montanistic Excesses . . .153 A — Adoptionism and Modatism 153 B — Montanistic Excesses 156 CHAPTER X Some Western Theologians and the Beginnings of Latin Theology 159 A — Tertullian: His Trinitarian and Christolc^ical Teaching 160 B — Novatian: His Treatise on the Trinity 169 C — St Cyprian: His Teaching on the Church 171 CHAPTER XI The Baptismal Controversy : Penance in the Early CnintCB 180 A — The Baptismal Controversy 180 B — Penance in the Early Church 183 DigiLizedbyGoOglc CONTENTS vii CHAPTER XII ,jic FisST Attbufts at Systematic Theology in the East ... 190 A — Qement of Alexandria 190 B — Origen: Akxaodria and Csesarea 197 CHAPTER Xin FsoH THE Death of Origen to the Council of Nic£a . . . 210 CHAPTER XIV RiseoftheAkiam Heresy AND THE Council OF Nicsa . . . 218 A — Rise of the Arian Heresy 219 B — The Council of Nioea 223 C — Some Fourth Century Theologians 228 CHAPTER XV The Rgactioh Afteb Nicxa: Its Causes: An Outline of TUB Abiak Controversy 236 A — The Reaction After Nicsea 236 B — Nature and Causes of the Arian Controversy . ■ ■ . 237 C — An Outline of the Arian Controversy 240 CHAPTER XVI The Macedonian and Afollinariam Heresies: The Second General Council 247 CHAPTER XVII The Essence and Attributes of God: The Blessed Trinity 254 A — The Essence and Attributes of God 254 B — The Blessed Trintfy 360 CHAPTER XVIII MAHICHiBISll AND PRISCILLIANISM : ThE PrOBLEH-OF EviL: The Work of Creation 276 A — Manichtcism and Friscillianism 276 B — The Problem of Evil 382 C— The Work of Creation 264 DigiLizedbyGoOglc viii CONTENTS CHAPTER XIX PACT Angelology: Amthsdpologv 293 A — Angelology 293 B — Anthropology 299 CHAPTER XX The WoBD Incarnate: The Redeuption of the World . . 308 A — The Word Incarnate 308 B — The Redemption of the World 316 CHAPTER XXI The DoNATiST Heresy: Ecclesiology 323 CHAPTER XXII Sacrahbhtal Theology 338 CHAPTER XXIII Pelagiamism and the Question of Original Sin .... 357 CHAPTER XXIV The Question OF Grace: Seui-Pelagianisu 368 A — The Question of Grace 369 B — SemUPelagianism 379 CHAPTER XXV The Nestoriam Heresy: The Council of Efhesus . . .387 A — The Nestorian Heresy 387 B — The Council of Epbesus 396 CHAPTER XXYI The Mohofhysite Heresy : The Council of Chalcedon . . 401 A — The Monophysite Heresy 401 B — The Council of Chalcedon 404 CHAPTER XXVII Some New Dissensions: The Three Chapters: The Fifth General Council 412 A — Some New Dissensions 413 B — The Three Chapters 415 C — The Fifth General Council 417 DigiLizedbyGoOglc CONTENTS ix CHAPTER XXVIII faot The MoHOTHBLiTK Controversy : The Sixth General CouMCiL 422 A — The Monothelite Controversy 423 B— The Sixth General Council 428 CHAPTER XXIX CONTEMPORABY ChRISTOLOGY : ORTHODOX MaBIOLOGY . . . 433 A — Contemporary Christoli^y 433 B — Orthodox Mariology 441 CHAPTER XXX The Veneration of the Saints : The Doctsine of Porgatoby : eschatological views 449 A — The Veneration of the Saints 449 B — The Doctrine of Purgatory 452 C — Elschatological Views 457 CHAPTER XXXI Soke Supplementary Rbuabks on Subjects Dealt with in THE Preceding Chapters 464 CHAPTER XXXII The Image Controversy: The Seventh General Council 476 A — Historical Aspect of the Question 477 B — The Iconoclast Heresy 4S1 C — The Seventh General Council 486 CHAPTER XXXIII The Fiuoque Controversy : Spanish Adoptionism : The Eighth General Covncil 489 A— The Filioque Controversy 490 B — Spanish Adoptionism ^ C — The Eighth Genera! Council 501 Conclusion 504 Index 509 DigiLizedbyGoOglc D,j.,.db,Googlc BIBLIOGRAPHY The foUowing is a partial list of books consulted in the tomposition of this Manual. Those marked * are by non-Catholic authors. Works especiaUy adapted for supplementary reading are referred to in a foot- note at ^e beginning of each chapter. Ahag, J., GrundrisB der Patrologie. Vierte Auflage. Herder, Frei- burg, i88S. Atzberger, L., Die Christliche Eschatologie in den Stadien ihrer Offen- barung. Herder, Freiburg, 1890. Geschichte der Christlichen Eschatologie innerhalb der vomicaen- ischen Zeit. Herder, Freiburg, 1896. ^^Die Logoslehre dea hL Atbanasius. Muenchen, 1880. Bardenhewer, O., Patrolo{^. Translated from the Second German Edition by Thomas Sh^ian, D.D. Herder, St. Louis, 1908. Geschichte der Altlurchlichen Litteratur, 3 vols. Herder, Frei- burg, 1902-12. BatifFol, P., Primitive Catholicism. Translated from the Fifth French Edition by H. L. Brtanceau. Longmans, New York, 1911. ^— £tudes d'Histoire et de Thtelogie Positive. Cinquieme Edition, J. Gabalda & Cie, Paris, 1907. • Benson, White, E., Cyprian: His Life, His Times, His Work. D. Appleton, New York, 1897. • Bethune-Baker, J. F„ An Introduction to the Early History of Chris- tian Doctrine. Methuen & Co., London, 1903. Cumont, F., The Mysteries of Mithra. Translated from the Second Revised French Edition by Thomas J. McConnack. Keagan Paul, London, 1903. IVAlfe, A., La Thiologic de Saint Hippolyte. Bcauchesne & Cie, Paris, 1906. 1^ Thfologie de TertnllietL Beauchesne & Cie, Paris, 1905. L'fidit de Calliste: £tude sur les Origines de la Pfeiteoce Chritienne. Beauchesne & Cie. Paris, 1915. DoelUnger, J. 1., Hippolytus and Callistus, or the Church of Rome in the first half of the Third Century. Edinburgh, 1876. Tew and Gentile in the Courts of the Temple of Christ, 2 vols. 1862 foil. • Domer, A., Grundriss der Dogmengeschichte, Reimer, Berlin, 1899. Duchesne, L., Early History of the Christian Church. Translated from the Fourth French Edition, 2 vols. Longmans, New York, 1911-12. 3d DigiLizedbyGoOglc xii BIBLIOGRAPHY Christian Worship: Its Origin and Evolution. A Study of the Latin Liturgy up to the Time of Charlemagne. Translated from the Third French Edition by M. L McClure. Second English Edition, London, 1904. Dufourcq, A., Saint Irin^ Deuxi^e Edition. Lecoffre, Paris, 1904. * Farrar, F., Lives of the Fathers, 2 vols. MacMillan, New York, 1889. Feder, A. L, Justins des Macrtyrers Lehre von Jesus Christus. Eine Dogmengeschichtliche Monographic. Herder, Freiburg, 1906. Felten, J., Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, oder Judentum und Hei- dentum zur Zctt Christi und der Apostel, 2 vols. Manz, Regens- burg, 1 9 10. Fortescue, A., The Orthodox Eastern Church. Second Edition. Cath- olic Truth Society, London, 1908. Funk, F. X., Patres Apostoiici, 2 vols. Tuebingen, 1901. Didascalia et Const itutiones Apostolorum. Paderborn, 1905. Kirchengeschichtliche Abhandlungen und Untersuchungcn, 3 vols. Paderborn, 1897 foil. * Gwatkin, H. M., Studies of Arianism, chiefly referring to the char- acter and chronology of the reaction which followed the Council of Nicxa. Second Edition. Cambridge, 1900. ♦Harnack, A., Lchrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 3 vols. Vierte neu durchgearbeitete und vermehrte Auflage. Tuebingen, 1909. Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christentums in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten, 2 vols. Zweite Auflage. Leipzig, 1906. Hefele, C, J., A History of the Councils of the Church, 7 vols. Second German Edition, 1879 foil. Only the first three volumes have been translated into English. Edinburgh, T, & T. Gark. Hcrgenroether, J., Handbuch der allgemeinen Klrchengeschichte, 3 vols. Vierte Auflage, neu bearbeitet von Dr. J. P. Kirsch. Herder, Freiburg, 1902. Photius, Patriarch von Konstantinopel. Sein Leben, seine Schrif- ten und das Griechische Schisma, 3 vols. 1867-69. Kellner, K. A H,, Heortology: A History of Christian Festivals. Herder, St, Louis, 1908, Kern, J,, Tractatus de Extrema Unctione. Pustet, Ratisbon, 1907. Klee, H., Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, 2 vols. Mainz, 1837 foil. Kirsch, J. P., Die Lehre von der Gemeinschaft der Heiligen im Christ- lichen Alterthum. Kirchheim, Mainz, 1900. Krebs, E., Der Logos als Heiland im ersten Jahrhundert. Herder, Freiburg, 1910. Lebreton, J. Les Origines du Dogme de la Trinity Beauchesne & Cie, Paris, 1910. Lepin, M., Christ and the Gospel or Jesus the Messiah and Son of God. Authorized English Version. McVey, Philadelphia, 1910. * Lightfoot, J. B., Dissertations on the Apostolic Age. Ltmdon, 1892. The Apostolic Fathers, 4 wis. London, 1885-90. DigiLizedbyGoOglc BIBLIOGRAPHY xui 'Loofs, F., hnttadca ram Studitun der Dogmengeschichte. Dritte Auflage. Halle, 1892. Maguire, E., Is Schism Lawful? A Study in Primitive Ecclesiology with Special Reference to the Question of Schism. Gill A Son, Dublin, 1915. Mansi, Joan. Dom., Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Col- lectio, 63 vols. Paris, 1903 folL Migne, J. F., Patralogix Cursus Completus. Series Gneca, 161 vols. Series Latina, 221 vols. Paris, 1854 foil Newman, J. H., An Essay on the Development of Giristian Doctrine. Eleventh Edition. Lonemans, New York, 1900. The Arians of the FourOi Century. New Edition. London, 1901. O'Donnell, M. J., Penance in the Early Church. Gill & Son, Dublin, 1908. O'Dwycr, M., Confirmation. A Study of the Development of Sacra- mental Theology. Benziger, New York, 1915. * Otto, J. K. T., Corpua Apologetarum Christianorum Saecult Secundi, 9 vols. Third Edition. Jena, 1876 foil. Petavius, Dionys., De Thcologicis Dogmatibus, 4 vols. Paris, 1644 folL Pourrat, P., Theology of the Sacraments. A Study in Positive The- ology. Authorized Translation from the Third French Edition. Herder, SL Louis, 19 10. Prat, P., La Thtelogie de Saint Paul, 2 vols. Deuxi^e Edition. Beauchesne & Cie, Paris, 1908-10. Probst, P., Liturgie der drei ersten Jahrhunderte. Tuebingen, 1870. Liturgie des 4 Jahrhunderts und deren Reform. Muenster, 1^3. * Ramsay, W. M., The Church in the Roman Empire before 170. London, i8(}3. Rauschen, G., Eucharist and Penance in the First Six Centuries of the Church. Authorized Translation from the Second German Edition. Herder, St, Louis, 1913. Grundriss der Patrologie, mit besonderer Beruecksichtigung der Dogmengeschichte. Herder, Freiburg, 190& * Rcalencyklopsdie fuer Protestantische Theolog^e imd Kirche, 22 vols. Herzog-Hauck, Leipzig, 18^1909. Renaudot, E., Liturgiarum Orientalium CoUectio, 2 vols. Paris, 1715-16. Riviere, J., The Doctrine of the Atonement, 2 vols. Authorized Trans- lation by Luigi Cappadelta. Herder, St. Louis, 1909. Schwane, J., Htstoiie des Do^es, 6 vols. French Translation from the Second German Edition by A. Degert and P. Belet. Beau- chesne & Cie, Paris, 1903-4, Stmckmann, A., Die Gegenwart Christi in der hi. Eucharistie nach den schriftlichen Quellen der vomicanischen Zeit Wien, 1905. * Swainson, C. A., The Greek liturgies, chiefly from original authori- ties. Cambridge, 18S4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc xiv BIBLIOGRAPHY Thurston, H, The Memory of our Dead Herder, St Louis, 1916. Tlxeront, J., History of Dc^mas, 3 vols. Patristic Period Translated from the Fifth French Edition by H. L B. Herder, St. Louis, 1910-16, Toner, P. J,, Dissertatio Historico-Theologica dc Lapsu et Peccato Origfinali. Browne & Nolan, Dublin, 1904. Truth Society, Catholic, Lectures on the History of Religions, S vols. Herder, St Louis, igio-ii. Turmel, J,, Histoire de fa Thfologie Positive, 2 vols. Beauchesne ft Cie, 1904-6. Wilpcr^ J., Die Malereicn in den Katakomben Roms. Freiburg, 190^ DigiLizedbyGoOglc A MANUAL OF THE HISTORY OF DOGMAS INTRODUCTION Dc^nu and the HJstoiy of Dogmu The word dogma, like many other religious and philosophi- cal terms adopted from ancient usage, received a new meaning as employed by Christian writers. In the philosophical lan- guage of Greece it was commonly used to signify tenets or doctrines resting on a solid basis, whether of authority or reason, and as such claiming the assent of a prudent mind. In this sense Plutarch speaks of " the dogmas concerning the soul"' and Aristotle refers to the "unwritten dogmas of Plato." ' Latin writers on philosophy attached a similar meaning to the term. Thus, for instance, Cicero says that the decrees of wisdom " are called dogmata by philosophers, and none of them can be set aside without making one guilty of a crime." ' This was, however, a derived meaning. Primarily the term denoted anything that seemed good or reasonable; hence an opinion, a resolution, a precept, or ordinance. In this sense it occurs several times in Holy Scripture, especially in the New Testament. Thus the edict of Qesar Augustus, that the whole world should be enrolled, is called a dogma;* a body of such edicts is referred to as dogmata;^ ordinances of the Mosaic Law are designated by the same term,' as are also the authoritative decisions of the Council of Jerusalem in reference to the observances enjoined by the Law of Christ,' Early Christian writers use the term in both senses, and sometimes in one and the same connection. Ignatius of An- tioch, for instance, speaks of the " dogmata of the Lord and ' Mot. 14, 3. • Acts, 16, 4. * Phys. Ausc. 4. *■ • Ephes, a, 15. ■ Acad. 3, 9. ' Acts, 16, 4; 15, aa * Luk^ a, I. DigiLizedbyGoOglc a INTRODUCTION the Apostles," ' understanding thereby th«r teaching and precepts. TTie Greek Apologists of the second century fre- quenUy refer to the " Christian dogmata " as a philosophy of Ufe, regarding them as a guide both in respect of faith and moral conduct Little by little, however, we find the term restricted to matters of faith as contrasted with precepts. Thus Cyril of Jerusalem, who wrote in the fourth century, says : " The way of godliness is composed of two things, pious doctrines (dogmata) and good actions." • This latter has become the exclusive meaning of Christian dogma. Still, even as used at present, the term has both a wider and a stricter sense. In its wider sense it is applied to any doctrine which in the eyes of the Church is essential to the true interpretation of the faith. In its more restricted mean- ing it denotes a revealed truth which has in some way been defined by an infallible teaching authority, and as such is pro- posed to the acceptance of the faithful. It is only in this latter sense that the term is used in the History of Dogmas. Hence Christian Dogma is obviously less inclusive than Christian Doctrine ; for this latter comprises not only defined . truths, but also such others as are ordinarily set forth in the instruction of the faithful with the simple approval of the magisterium ecclesiasticum. Obviously, too, Christian Dogma presupposes two things : the fact of revelation and the existence of an infallible teaching authority. The History of Dogmas is a part of Ecclesiastical History, and as such it forms a record of the development of the Church's teaching, taking due account of the causes of that development, both internal and external, and presenting the final results of this critical inquiry in an orderly manner. It presupposes that revealed truths are objectively permanent and immutable, and also that their subjective apprehension and outward expression admits of progress. Hence whilst the meaning of doctrines once revealed never changes, these doc- trines may nevertheless in course of time come to be under- stood more fully, be presented more clearly, and receive a cer- •AA Magn. 13. 'Catech. 4, a. DigiLizedbyGoOglc INTRODUCTION 3 tain emphasis from their due coordination with other truths. In this sense every revealed truth is a living germ, the growth and unfolding of which is traced up and recorded in the His- tory of Dogmas. The determining cause of this growth is twofold. First, the God-given vitality of the Church, which assimilates ever more fully the contents of revealed truths as time passes on. Secondly, the rise of heresies, which calls for a clearer state- ment of the truths contained in the depositum Udei. Both contribute to the development of dogmas, but each in its own way. How vast this development has been, and, by inference, will continue to be, one begins to realize only on comparing the definitions of later councils, as, for instance, that of Trent, with corresponding statements of the same revealed truths as contained in the Patristic writings of the first centuries of the Church. Equivalence of thought there may be, and identity of objective reality, of course, there is ; but in all else the two seem worlds apart. These early Fathers believed all that we believe, for they had the complete depositum fidei; but much of what they believed was only implicitly contained in the faith as then explicitly taught by the Church. It required ages of thought and struggle before the mustard seed of the Gospel could grow into a fully developed tree, whose branches extend ever farther and farther over the vast region of re- vealed truth. To trace up these various lines of thought, to follow in retrospect these mental struggles towards a fuller and clearer light, properly constitutes the object of the History of Dog- mas. It implies, therefore, an unbiased and critical investi- gation of facts, an historical sifting of evidence, in reference to the development of those religious truths which the Church has authoritatively declared to have been revealed by God. It calls for an accurate and truthful determination of the " course followed by Christian thought in that evolution which thus brought it from the primitive elements of its doctrine to the development of its theology. What were the stages in that DigiLizedbyGoOglc 4 INTRODUCTION progress? What impulses, what suspensions, what hesitations did it undergo? What circumstances threatened to bring about its deviation from that path, and, as a matter of fact, in certain parts of the Christian community, what deviations did occur ? By what men and how was this progress accom- plished, and what were the ruling ideas, the dominant princi- ples, which determined its course ? These questions the His- tory of Dogmas must answer." " From this it is sufficiently clear that the Sources of the His- tory of Dogmas must include all the records of both the in- ternal and external life of the Church — the works of the Fathers and' of ecclesiastical writers, the writings of heretics, the various symbols of the faith, liturgical works and Chris- tian art, constitutions, decrees, and decisions of Popes and Congregations, declarations and definitions of councils, both general and particular, and whatever else may bear witness to the gradual unfolding and final maturing of any given dogma, beginning with the first heart-throb of the Infant Church, after the Pentecostal showers had descended upon the Apos- tles, and leading up to that fullness of life which she may have attained at the moment when the history of dogmatic de- velopment is set down by the writer. Strictly speaking, the records of revelation itself do not fall within the scope of the History of Dogmas, although a general outline of the revealed truths contained therein is almost in- dispensable for a full understanding of later developments. To prove that the contents of Holy Scripture are truly the word of God, and to show what progress there was in the manifes- tation of that word, are matters which the historian of dog- matic development must leave to writers who deal explicitly with the history of divine revelation. The most he can do is to group together the obvious teaching of the Sacred Writ- ings, and then show how this original deposit entered into Christian consciousness in later ages. He simply accepts the seed and records its growth. "> Tixeront, Hist Dogm. I, 2. DigiLizedbyGoOglc THE SOaAL AND REUGIOUS CONDITION OF THE GENTILE WORLD AT THE TIME OF THE FIRST PREACHING OF THE GOSPEL' As the reception and assimilation of truth, even in the super- natural order, is to some extent conditioned by the religious and moral disposition of the persons to whom it is proposed, it is first of alt necessary to cast a glance at the state of the world in which Christianity made its appearance. What was the social condition of the various peoples to whom the Gospel was preached ? What were their religious views, their moral tendencies, their philosophical interpretation of things? In one word, what was the nature of the soil in which the seed of revealed truth was first planted? Durbg the earlier centuries of the Christian era, the preach- ing of the Gospel was practically confined to tiie different countries that made up the Roman Empire. Territorially this was of vast extent, forming an immense ellipse, whose major axis extended from the north of England to the river Euphrates, whilst its minor axis reached from Lower Austria to the Sahara Desert. Its population was necessarily of an extremely heterogeneous character, comprising as it did a great variety of nations and tribes. Latins, Greeks, Egyptians, Syr- ians, Phoenicians, Jews, Celts, Teutons, and Iberians were * On the contents of this chapter tion of Ancient Religions ii well much valuable information may be treated in the series edited by Mar- found in Dr. Doellinger's work, tindale, under the title, " Lectures on "Jew and Gentile in the Courts of the Histoir ol Religions." Vols. I the Temple of Christ" The ques- ft II. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 6 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES all brought tc^ether into one great commonwealth, of which Rome was the mistress. Although each conquered nation con- tinued to dwell in -its ovra definite territory, still there was considerable intermingling of races, especially by way of colo- ni2ation and commerce. Thus Roman colonists established themselves among the Celts in Gaul and Britain, among the Iberians in Spain, among the Greeks in the Grecian Archipel- ago and in Asia Minor; whilst Jewish and Phoenician mer- chants settled down wherever there was hope of gain. Greek philosophers and rhetoricians, Oriental mystics, and charlatans from all over the Empire crowded the streets of Rome. It was a vast and varied throng to which the Gospel of Christ was about to be announced ; numbering in all, it is estimated, over a hundred million human beings. A — Social Conditions Rome was intent not only upon extending the boundaries of the State, but also on building up an empire in which the various discordant elements should be reduced to some sort of homogeneity. ■ Hence, so far as was consistent with the Ro- mans' sense of superiority, an effort was made to break down national barriers and to cause the conquered peoples to regard themselves as integral parts of a great world-empire. For this purpose the most distant provinces were closely bound to the Capital City by means of excellent military roads, by an effi- cient postal service, and the publication of Acta, wherein were recounted the current social happenings, court proceedings, and literary news. To conciliate the provincials still further, na- tional customs, religious worship and local administration of justice were usually not interfered with, although there was constantly a silent influence at work to make Roman views and Roman ways gain the ascendancy. The result of this was, not indeed national imity, but some sort of peaceful association, wherein conquerors and conquered admitted that they were made of the same clay. Yet whilst there was thus brought about some kind of rap~ Prochement between nation and nation, nothing of the sort was ever attempted between the free and the bond, between the rich DigiLizedbyGoOglc THE GENTILE WORLD 7 and the poor. In this respect Roman society was always di- vided against itself, and therein lay its weakness. Of the one hundred million inhabitants of the Empire at least a third were slaves. In some cities the proportion was even much higher. Rome itself at the time of Augustus counted over six hundred thousand in a population of a million and a half. Every wealthy citizen had his scores or hundreds or even thousands of slaves, employed partly in his city residence and partly on his rural estates. How miserable was the lot of these unfortu- nates, history tells only too plainly. In principle they were rated below beasts of burden, and in practice they frequently received worse treatment They were the master's absolute property, mere chattels, which he might use or abuse as he pleased. They had no legal personality, and consequently could find no redress. Very numerous, too, were the absolutely poor, who had no means of gaining a livelihood save only by begging or by ac- cepting largesses bestowed either by the State or by private patrons. This tatter abuse assumed in course of time frightful dimensions. Thus it is said of Augustus that he had to pro- vide daily rations of com and money for over two hundred thousand citizens, whilst thousands of stranded foreigners de- pended entirely on the crumbs that fell from thfe rich man's table. Charitable institutions there were none, nor was there charity. As Polybius puts it : "A Roman never gives any one anything ungrudgingly." The poor were commonly re- garded as accursed of the gods. In Greece poverty was equally widespread, but there, owing to a democratic form of govern- ment, the poor forced the rich to maintain them at the public expense. B — The State of Reugion At the beginning of the Christian era, the prevalent religion of the Empire was largely a sort of syncretism, resulting from a combination of the religious views and practices of the chief C(»nponent3 of the population. Of these the ancient Roman', the Greek, Egyptian, and Syrian played the principal parts. The Celtic and German rdigious views remained almost en- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 8 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES tirely confined to the peoples of these nationalities. Hence it is only of the former that anything need be said in this con- nection. 1°. Roman Religious Views: Roman Gods: Roman Phi- losophy and its Influence on Religion. — It has been said that the religion of Rome was based on only two ideas ' — the might of the gods who were friendly to the State and the power of religious ceremonies over the gods. Hence in practice re- ligion did not consist in the exercise of virtue as enjoined by the gods, but in the faithful and exact performance of re- ligious rites. The old Romans were indeed renowned for their virtus, but this term, including in its significance *' self-mastery, an unbending firmness of will, with patience, and an iron tenacity of purpose in carrying through whatever was once acknowledged to be right," had primarily an ethical bearing; in the minds of the people it was to all intents and purposes unconnected with religion. It was the ceremonial rites that constituted religion properly so called. These rites consisted of sacrifice and divinations, which were performed by an hierarchical priesthood, with the Pontifex Maximus at its head. The priesthood was largely hereditary, and up to the fourth century before Christ open only to persons of patrician rank. In the beginning human sacrifices seem to have been offered, but within the strictly historical period there is evi- dence only of the sacrifice of animals and the produce of the earth. As long as the Roman religion remained uninfluenced by the speculations of philosophy, and that was almost up to the foundation of the Empire, it was essentially polytheistic. Still, beyond even the mightiest gods there existed in the popu- lar mind the omnipotens fortuna and the ineluctabile fatum, which may perhaps be taken as a faint echo of a prim- itive monotheistic belief. The principal indigenous gods were Janus and Jana, Saturn, Jupiter Optimus Maximus, Juno, Vesta, Mars, and Ops. These were general nature-powers, or mere abstractions of the human state, and, until Greek in- fluence was brou^t to bear upon the popular view concerning them, th^ advanced to no real persondi^. D,g,;,zeclbyG00gIC THE GENTILE WORLD 9 Although the ancient Romans were an intensely practical pe<^Ie, without myths and without a literature, yet even dur- ing the first five hundred years of the city's existence, gods and genii multiplied exceedingly, so that nearly every human occupation and every circumstance of life had some superior being as its guardian and protector. This was a logical out- c * Drummon^ Philo Judaeus: Mar- i8 DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 19 united in national consciousness, in religious aspirations and mutual interest in each other's varying lEortimes, nevertheless in course of time they developed traits and views that were in some respects quite dissimilar. Hence a few remarks on eadi of these two groups will be tn place. A — The Palestinian Jews: Their Messianic Hopes The rule of the Persians, which extended from 537 to 330 B. C, was, all things considered, extremely mild, and placed no obstacles in the way of religious and national development Some influence was indeed exerted on Jewish teaching, espe- cially in the domains of angelology, demonology, and escha- tology, but this was by way of quickening development rather than by the absorption and incorporation of foreign doctrines. Thus, although the scepter had in a manner passed from Judah, Jewish national and religious life remainul practically intact Matters assumed quite a different aspect' during the period of Greek domination. In 330 Alexander the Great did homage to the high priest Onias, conquered Persia and all the neigh- boring countries, and then subjected the Jews to Greek nie. Thenceforth a strong Hellenizing influence was brought to bear upon Jewish customs and manner of life. This reached its climax under Antiochus Epiphanes, who, in 170, attempted the extirpation of the Jewish religion and the conversion of the Temple at Jerusalem into a sanctuary of Jupiter Olympus. The attempt failed of its purpose, yet many there were who from that time on followed the ways of the Greeks. Shortly after ensued the fierce struggle for liberty under the leadership of the Maccabees, the Asmonean high priests, which resulted in a quasi-independence that lasted for about a hundred years. After that time, in a fratricidal conflict between Aristobulus and Hyrcanus II, an appeal was made to Rome, whereupon Pompey marched with his legions into Palestine, took Jerusalem in 63, and established Roman supre- macy throughout the land. Then, by favor of Rome, Herod the Idumean was made king. He oppressed the Jews for y; years, rrimilt the Temple in a most magnificent style, made DigiLizedbyGoOglc 20 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES and unmade high priests at will, murdered every one in whtxn he suspected the slightest opposition, tried all possible schemes to Hellenize the people, and left the cotmtry in a ruinous state to his sons. A few years later Rome ^>pointed a pro- curator, who governed Palestine as a Roman province. These various political disturbances, and more especially the accompanying religious oppressions, wrought a profound change in the life of the people. Early in the third century before Christ, when the Greeks endeavored to exercise a far- reaching influence on Judaism, three different parties were formed that remained in existence till the destruction of the nation. The first of these was that of the Pharisees, including all lovers of the Law, and therefore the bulk of the people. Prominent in this party were the scribes, who since the Cap- tivity had become the authorized expounders of the Law. To it also belonged those priests who were not mere tools in the hands of the ruling power. Because of their great zeal for the Law, these Pharisees and scribes erected around it a " gader " or hedge, consisting of traditions and interpreta- tions which in course of time were regarded as binding as the Law itself. It was chiefly these "traditions of men" that made the Law so burdensome, and later on caused the name of Pharisee to stand for a mere outward show of right- eousness. Hence Christ's terrible denunciation of them as recorded in the Gospel. Sprung from a legitimate zeal for the Law, the party ended by betraying the Law to its own private interests. The second party was that of the Sadducees, the reputed disciples of Sadok (291-260), who adopted the principles of the Hellenists. They repudiated the traditions of the Phari- sees, disregarded the " gader," and appealed almost exclusively to the Thora, without, however, rejecting the other books of the Old Testament. In philosophy, although admitting the creation of the world in the accepted Jewish sense, they were followers of Epicurus, denying God's continuous operation in the universe, the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the dead, and the existence of angels. Yet in spite of this, they toc^ part in the services and sacrifices of the Temple, DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 21 practiced circumcision, observed the Sabbath, and wished to be considered as real Jews. In social life, however, they con- ducted themselves as Greeks. The third party, numerically insignificant, was that of the Essenes, a body of ascetics, who based their asceticism partly on Judaism and partly on Greek philosophy. They clung tenaciously to the Mosaic Law, but at the same time admitted many non-Jewish elements in their religious practices and beliefs. In some respects there is a close resemblance between their mode of life and that of early Christian ascetics, but no genetic relation can be shown to exist. There is no particiJar need of reviewing here the theo- logical doctrines of the Palestinian Jews, as we find them practically all reproduced in the Gospels and in the preaching of the Apostles. Still a brief outline seems to be in place. The following points will be sufficient for our purpose. 1°. God: The Blessed Trinity. — Although the Jews, in spite of the prohibition of the law, came in frequent contact with idolaters and on divers occasions many individuals yielded to the fascination of foreign cults, nevertheless as a nation they were strict monotheists. From the first page of the Old Testament to the last, Elohim, or Jahve, is consistently repre- sented as the one and only God. And the same teaching is also found in later apocryphal writings. Nor is He considered merely as a national deity, but as the one true God of all men and the whole world ; although for providential reasons He made the children of Israel His own special people. The pagan gods are spoken of as Elilim (worthless), or as demons, who are no gods at all, but are foolishly worshiped as such t^f the wicked. Some day Jahve will bring back the Gentiles to His service. The existence of this one God is nowhere proved in the Sacred Writings; it is assumed as evident, and only " the fool saith in his heart there is no God." God is a spirit, whom no man can see and live. He is bring itself ; without beginning and without end, unchangeable alike in perfection and counsel. He knows all things, and nothing is hidden from His eyes. He fills all things and all space with His presence, and of His wisdom, justice, and DigiLizedbyGoOglc 23 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES mercy there is no end. All these attributes, however, are usually spoken of in a concrete way, to suit the understanding of a simple people. Anthropomorphisms and plural designa- tions occur rather frequently; but the context, either proximate or remote, contains its own corrective. The mystery of the Blessed Trinity is not explicitly taught in the Old Testament, but allusions to it are found in not a few texts. The expression in Genesis, " Let us make man to our image and likeness: . . . and God created man to his image: to the image of God he created him," may be said to be an implicit statement of the Trinitarian doctrine as understood in Christian times. The plurality of divine per- sons is rather clearly taught in the Book of Proverbs and Ecclesiasticus, where Wisdom is represented as a distinct hypostasis. But whether the Jews realized the full import of these texts is not so certain. The doctrine implied in these and similar passages becomes clear only when the Old Testa- ment is read in the light shed upon it by the New. To this as to many other Christian doctrines contained in the Old Testament is applicable the saying of St. Augustine : " In Vetere Novum latet, et in Novo Vetus patet." 2°. God's Relation to the World. — By an act of His omnip- otent will, Jahve drew all things out of nothingness; and He can again reduce them all to nothingness by withdrawing His sustaining power. He holds the world in the hollow of His hand. Yet He is a good and wise Providence, who loves His creatures and fills them all with blessings. " Good things and evil, life and death, poverty and riches, are from God." Creatures are an outward expression of His goodness, yet ultimately they must all serve to promote His glory ; be- cause He has made them for Himself, and His glory He will not give to another. 3°. Angels and Men. — Good and bad angels appear on the very first pages of the Bible; for Satan under the appearance of a serpent brought about man's fall, and after the fall Cherubims were appointed to guard the gates of paradise. These angels are everywhere represented as spirits, endowed with intellect and free will. More perfect than men, they are DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 23 neverthd«ss created beings, although their creation is nowhere recorded in explicit terms. Their fidelity to their Maker was subjected to a trial, and some of them proved unfaithful. These latter appear as workers of evil The good angels are the messengers of God and the bearers of His commands to men. They protect both individuals and nations, whilst the evil spirits seek to encompass man's ruin. Only a few of either class are known by name; but of the good, at least, there are vast multitudes. For " thousands of ^ousands min- istered to Him, and ten thousand times a hundred thousand stood before Him." It may be noted in passing, that there is no real resemblance between these angels, as represented in the Old Testament, and the genii and daimones of pagan mythology; though many critics hold that Persian aogelology had some influence on the later development of Jewish behef in this matter. After the angels, in the order of natural perfection, man appears as the noblest of God's creatures. He was made to the image and likeness of God. His body was formed of the slime of the earth, and his soul was " breathed into his face " by his Maker. He is, therefore, made up of two distinct elements ; a material body and a spiritual soul. He is physi- cally free to choose between good and evil ; but he is morally bound to render faithful service to his Creator. In perfec- tion he is a little less than the angels. Between him and God exists not only the relation of servant and Master, but also of child and Father. This latter rela- tion is not brought out very distinctly in the Pentateuch, but it appears quite prominently in the Psalms and the Prophetical Books. Man's elevation to the supernatural state is coily im- plied in most of the texts that refer to his primitive condition, though there are a few that are usually interpreted as stating it explicitly. Originally he was destined for temporal and eternal happiness, but both were made dependent (Mi his fidelity to God. He proved unfaithful and lost both. However, owing to the great mercy of God, his eternal happiness was again made possible Tlie first man's fall is the origin of all evil in the world. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 34 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Reinstated in God's friendship, in view of the merits of a future Redeemer, the making of his fortune is once more placed in man's own hands. A terrible conflict between his inclinations to good and evil is inevitable ; but in this conflict God is on his side. In what precisely the divine assistance consists is not clearly stated ; yet it ts represented as enabling men both to know, to will, and to do what is right, and thus to become holy even as God is holy. As required of the chosen people, this holiness demands both legal and moral purity, so that in practice it is identical with the keeping of the ceremonial and the moral law. For the Gentiles, how- ever, the moral law alone is of obligation. Adam's fall and the subsequent sinfiUness of all men stand out prominently in the various books of the Old Testament, and they give a distinct coloring to later apocryphal litera- ture. Yet with all this, there is little said in eiUier class of writings about the existence and transmission of original sin. In the canonical books several texts are pointed out by theo- logians, and also by some of the Fathers, as containing the doctrine; but others interpret these texts in a different sense. Perhaps the clearest reference to the inheritance of a moral stain from Adam is found in the fourth book of Esdras, where we read : " O tu, quid fecisti, Adam ? Si enim tu pec- casti, non est factus solius tuus casus, sed et noster qut ex te advenimus" (7,48). Forgiveness could be obtained for all sins, however grievous and many, provided the sinner was truly repentant and con- fessed his sinfulness before God. But even in the case of true repentance, and consequent forgiveness of sin, temporal chas- tisement was not rarely inflicted by the justice of Jahve. Under certain conditions, moreover, sin-offerings were re- quired, but they had no real sacramental efficacy. It was the conversion of the heart that counted — true sorrow for sins and a firm purpose of future amendment 4°. The Law of Worship Comprised Two Parts: SacrHtces and the SanctiUcation of the Sabbath. — Sacrifices could be oflEered only by the priests, who by divine ordination were of DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 25 the family of Aaron. They were presided over by the high priest, whose succession to office was by heredity, and origi- nally he could be removed only by death or on accoimt of some great crime. In the preparation of the victims the priests were assisted by Levites. Menial offices connected with the sacrificial worship were performed by Temple slaves. After the Temple had been built, sacrifices could be offered only in Jerusalem. The beneficiaries of these sacrifices were, accord- ing to circumstances, both individuals and the whole nation. This sacrificial and ceremonial law, however, was intended to be only temporary ; after the advent of the Messias it was to be replaced by a more spiritual worship. The sanctification of the Sabbath consisted exclusively in rest from unnecessary work, although in later times it was customary to gather in the synagogues, where portions of the Thora, the Prophets, and cither Holy Books were read aloud and explained. This custom seems to have originated with Esdras, after the Captivity. At the conclusion of the homily the people were dismissed by a blessing of the priest, the congregation answering. Amen. Here, as we shall see later, we have the type of Christian worship as gathered around the sacrifice of the New Law. 5". The Family Was by DhAne InsHluHon Monogatnous, ond Divorce a vinculo Was Originally Prohibited. — 'However, owing to their " hardness of heart," lie Jews later on obtained a dispensation in this matter, so that thereafter a man could lawfully have several wives simultaneously, and for anything " shameful " could dismiss one or all of them by giving a " libelltts repudii." The wife, on the other hand, had no right of divorce, althouf^ when duly dismissed she was allowed to marry again. 6°. Eschatology. — The Jewish doctrine concerning the final consummation of things does not appear very clearly defined. As a sanction of the moral law, the hereafter plays a rather subordinate part in both canonical and apocryphal writings. It is usually rewards and punishments during the present life that are held out as inducements to render God faithful serv- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 26 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES ice ; yet these rewards and punishments are not disconnected with, and exclusive of, a continued existence beyond the tomb. The following points will make this clear. Death and judgmoit are consecutive, so that one follows immediately upon the other ; for " it is easy before God in the day of death to reward every one according to his works." That this was also the popular belief is necessarily presup- posed in Christ's parable of Dives and Lazarus. Besides the retribution immediately after death, there is to be a general judgment at the end of time, which will inaugurate each one's eternal condition. In Jewish apocryphal literature, however, this general judgment is usually brought into close connection with the Messias' reign on earth, either forming its begin- ning or its end. It shall be preceded by a resurrection of the dead, which Daniel and Joel represent as general, but which the Apocryphas limit to the Jews or just alone, who shall have a share in the Messianic reign. What were the expected conditions of the great hereafter is somewhat obscurely expressed. Judging from what is said in the Book of Henoch and IV Esdras, Jewish belief was that there would be a temporal happiness or misery until the final sentence of the Great Judge. In the Psalms, on the other hand, the temporal abode of the dead is spoken of only in a general way, and pictured in rather dark colors. It is a still, gloomy spot, apparently in the bowels of the earth, where souls are indeed at rest from the troubles of the world above, but where they seem to lead a dull, inactive, and com- fortless existence Job's description of it strikes one as still more terrible. Of course, as we know from New Testament teaching that even the just could not enter heaven until the ascension of the Saviour, this gloomy view of the hereafter may be understood as bearing reference only to the delay of eternal beatitude. At the last judgment, Daniel tells us, " some shall rise unto life everlasting, and others unto reproach, to see it always." And Job expects, after that dark intermediate condition, a happy eternity: for "I know that my Redeemer liveth; He will stand as the last one on the dust of my grave; my eyes DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 37 shall behold Him, and no stranger." The same is also the hope of the Psalmist. The wicked, on the other hand, shall be cast into Gehenna, where, acconling to Isaias, they shall dwell with devouring fire, with everlasting burnings. To purgatory there is no direct reference, save only in II Mac- cabees, where it is stated as the Jewish belief that it is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from their sins. After this general outline of Old Testament teaching, and of current Jewish beliefs as gathered from apocryphal writ- ings, it seems much to our purpose to give a somewhat more detailed account of Israel's Messianic hope, since the realiza- tion of this forms the very central point of the Gospel mes- sage. The following paragraphs contain a fairly complete thouf^ brief statement. Messianic prophecies are found scattered through the whole of the Old Testament, and find a clear echo in later apocry- phal writings. Beginning with the rather obscure announce- ment of a future Saviour immediately after the fall,* these predictions become clearer and more definite as time passes on. The Messias is to be of the posterity of Abraham,* of the tribe of Judah,* of the family of David." He shall be preceded by the angel of the Lord, and shall glorify the second Temple.' He shall be of virgin birth,' shall be bom in Bethlehem of Juda,* sixty-nine weeks of years " from the going forth of the word, to build up Jerusalem again," ° after die scepter has passed from Judah."' He shall be Emanuel, God with us; His name shall be called Wonderful, God the Mighty, Counselor, Prince of Peace." He shall grow up as a child of poverty in the land of Galilee,'^ shall be of a most lovable character, quiet and gentle, the friend of the poor and forsaken.^" He shall cause the blind to see, the dumb to • G«i. 3, 15. ■ MicL s. 2. • Ibid. 12, 1-3 ; ai. 15-18. • Dan. 9, 21-25, •Ibid 49, I-IO. «»G«I1. 49, i-io. • I Par. 17, 4, t(^ II ; II Kings, 7, " Is. 7, 14 ; 9, 6. 13-16. '* Ibid. 9, t, 2; 53. 2. ■ Mai. 3, 1 ; Agg. a, 7-11. >• Ibid. 42. 1-4. » I». 7, t4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 28 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES speak and the lame to walk>* But in the end He shall be dis- owned by His own people, betrayed by His friend, subjected to untold sufferings, so that He is verily a worm and no man." In the middle of the last week of years, He shall be slain, con- firming the New Covenant Then great tribulations shall ensue, the sacrifice of the Law shall fail, and a people with their leaders shall come to destroy the city and the sancttary, and in the Temple there shall be the abomination of desola- tion, and the desolation shall continue even" to the consum- mation and the end.'* But His sepulcher shall be glorious." He shall be a prophet greater than Moses,'^ a priest forever according to the order of Melchisedech," a king who shall sit on the throne of David and rule from sea to sea, and of His kingdom there shall be no end.^ Yet this kingdom shall be of a spiritual order, to be established on Sion, the Holy Mount, whither the Gentiles shall flock from all parts of the world.*^ In it there shall be a new sacrifice, a clean oblation, which shall be offered everywhere, from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof, and Jahve's name shall be great among the Gentiles."' And because this priest-king shall lay down His life for sin, hence He shall see a long-lived seed, and the will of the Lord shall be prosperous in His hand.** This is the prophetic view of the Messias, the inspired teaching of the Old Testament; but with this the popular view only partly coincided. The people were at all times firmly convinced that a Messias would come, yet the manner of His coming and the work He was to accomplish were vari- ously colored by the needs and hopes of each particular epoch. The prophetic predictions were scattered over a vast period of time; in themselves they appeared but as so many membra disjecta, which, taken singly, impressed no well defined pic- ture upon the popular mind. Hence it is not at all unintel- ligible that, in spite of the prophetic corrective, the long train Ibid. 42, 6, 7; 3S. 5.6. » Pa. 109, 4- bid. 53, 2-g. «» Zach. 9, 9, la >Bn. 9. 26. 27. " Ps. 2, 6-10. s. S3, 9; Ps. 15. la "Mai. I, ii. Deut 18, IS- — Is. 53, 10-13. D,j.,.db,Googlc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY sg of national disasters should have suggested to the despairing Jews the hope of an all-conquering Messias, who, as an earthly king, would crush the enemies of the chosen people^ He was to be David's son; the father had been the most powerful king of Israel's glorious past: could then the son be less? Was it not Jerusalem that was so clearly designated as the seat of His rule and the capital of His kingdom, where His throne was to be erected, and whither all the costly offerings of the Gentiles, their silver and their gold, were to flow to- gether? Hard pressed by their conquerors, the Jews readily interpreted these prophetic promises in a purely material sense, and the natural result was that they looked forward to an earthly ruler, who would restore the golden age of the nation's past. Should He come in any other form or guis^ they would not have Him. However, it would be a mistake to think that the whole Jewish nation had abandoned the prophetic idea of a spiritual Messias. Many there still were, both among the lowly and tile high, whose expectations found adequate expression in the " Nunc dimittis " of the holy old man Simeon, who was privileged to press the Child Jesus to his faithful heart on the occasion of the Saviour's presentation in the Temple. This appears not only from the Gospels, which record how the people were always ready to proclaim Jesus the long expected Messias, in spite of His humble and lowly appearance, but also from the apocryphal writings which originated in the century before Christ In them the Messianic kingdom is called " the assembly of the just," which no one can enter except through penance." TTie sovereign of this kingdom is holy and sinless, and no injustice shall be found in his realm.^ Hence the constantly repeated prayer: "O God, purify Israel on the day of healing grace, when its Anointed of the Lord shall come," and when "a good generation shall live in the fear of God and in the works of justice." *" Still this realization of the truth gradually disappeared from the "Enoch, 38, I. ablea of the Gospel, S9^3i EngL "" "-' — -' - Transl. by E. Leahy. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 30 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES minds of those who directed the hopes of the chosen people, and hence when Jesus came unto His own, " His own received Him not." B — The Jews of the Dispersion : Their Religious and Philosophical Views The Jews of the Dispersion, also called Hellenistic Jews, remained in the main faithful to the religious teaching of the Old Testament, yet their close contact with Greek culture and thought led them in many instances to put new interpreta- tions upon statements of the Bible which they had theretofore accepted in a literal sense. Many of them came gradually to believe that Moses and the Greek [^ilosophers were on a large number of points in substantial agreement, their teaching dif- fering chiefly in their respective viewpoints and in the termi- nology which they employed. To eliminate even this differ- ence, and to arrive at a more perfect understanding, they had recourse to an allegorical method of interpretation, which on the one hand did away with the fabulous mythology of the Greeks, and on the other enriched the rather meager philosophy of the Jews. It was this allegorical method of interpretation that was later on rendered so famous by the Christian scholars of Alexandria. Whilst treasuring the Sacred Books of their Palestinian home, these Hellenistic Jews gradually developed a religious literature of their own. The Greek translation of the LXX, the Book of Wisdom, the Second Book of Maccabees, and some deutero-canonical additions of other books, originated in their midst. So, too, did the apocryphal Third and Fourth Book of Maccabees, the Letter of the Pseudo-Aristeas, the Sibyline Oracles, and others. The fundamental doctrines of these various writings are generally identical with those con- tained in the Palestinian Old Testament, yet there are shades of differences that point to Greek influence. Anthropomor- phisms are usually avoided when speaking of God, the per- sonification of the Word is very marked, Messianic hopes are brought out but faintly, and much space is given to the con- sideration of man's condition after death. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 31 The one who tried most persistently to bring Jewish and Greek thought into closer relation was Philo, at once a believer and a philosopher. Not that he ultimately succeeded in his purpose, or could have; but along certain lines his influence was felt for centuries, even in Christian circles. The principal Jewish doctrines on which he stamped his philosophic mark may thus be summarized." i". The nature of God. — ^After the Platonic fashion, he looks upon God as wholly transcendent, of whom nothing de6nite can be affirmed ; for any affirmation places a limit in the Godhead, and is of its very nature exclusive of other properties. He is simply who is. Although He is eternal, immutable, free; yet He is without any quality or property whatever. He is so transcendent that He can have no direct contact with finite beings. 2°. Hence to explain the production of the world, Philo gathers together the teaching of Plato about pre-existing ideas, of the Stoics about the world-soul, of the Bible about the angels, and of Greek mythology about the demons, and out of these heterogeneous elements he constructs what may be called pre-existent dynamic ideas, which are the intermediaries of God's action upon the world, the Logoi through which He works. Whether or not these Logoi are really distinct from God, Philo does nowhere clearly state ; yet, on the one hand, they must be distinct, for their purpose is to keep God from immediate contact with the world and to save Him from beii^ the author of evil ; but, on the other hand, they cannot be distinct from God, since it is through them that the finite is brought into contact and participation with the infinite. Hence logically, these dynamic ideas are self -contradictory. And so, too, seems to be the concept of the Universal Logos, of which these dynamic ideas are partial or limited expres- sions. This Universal Logos is designated as God's image, God's shadow, God's first-bom son, another or a second God. •^Thc following suimnary of dicus, cc. 4, s. ^. vol II. Cfr. Philo's teaching has in part been Feder, Justina Lehre von Jesos taken from Tixeront,H.D. I, 49-54; Chriatus, i37-i43; Felten, op. cit and from Drummond's Pmlo Ju- I, 564, sqq. II, ig sqq. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 32 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Yet in himself he is but the sum and substance or rather a combination of the various powers through which God acts upon the world, and therefore merely an intermediary between God and the created universe. Hence Philo says of him that he is neither unbegotten like God, nor begotten like us, but in " an intermediary way." What this " intermediary way " is, Philo does not know, or at least he does not attempt to explain it, and so the whole concept seems to evanesce because of its intrinsic repugnance. In this connection it is well to note that Philo never hints at the identity of this Logos with the Messias. And further- more, notwithstanding such designations as first-bom son of God, another God, this Logos does not appear to have a real concrete personality, but to be simply a demiurgic and cosmic power, wholly alien from a God Revealer and Redeemer. Hence, if St John borrowed his terminology from Philo, which is not at all certain, he surely did not go to him for the con- tents of his doctrine. 3°. The Work of Creation. — ^Although Philo bears witness to the traditional belief in a creation out of nothing, he him- self seems to have followed Plato in assuming the existence of an eternal hyle, the source of all imperfection and evil, which God reduced to order by the agency of the dynamic forces indicated above, and then into portions of it He intro- duced a divine element as the source of physical and intellectual life, according to the nature of each being. In the order of sequence Philo follows more or less strictly the Mosaic account of creation, speaking first of the ai^els, which in his treatment very closdy resemble Plato's inferior gods. They are distributed in different spheres, one above the other. The highest are exclusively occupied with the service of God ; others, nearer the earth, have united them- selves to bodies and become the souls of men. Bad angels, or demons, he identifies with evil souls. Man is made up of three elements : the intellect, " the soul of the soul," whidi comes from God ; the inferior soul, which is propagated by generation; and the body. In this Philo teaches trichotomy, a doctrine that later on appeared some- DigiLizedbyGoOglc ISRAEL AND CHRISTIANITY 33 times in Christian writers. The human body, being made up of matter, is conceived as essentially evil. Its mere contact defiles the soul. Hence man is of his very nature inclined to moral iniquity, and of himself he is powerless against the promptii^ of his lower instincts. With this, however, the author nowhere connects the idea of original sin, as contracted in the fall of Adam. Because man is thus inclined to evil, hence there is need of ascetical practices, that he may be enabled to lead a life of virtue uid become acceptable to his Maker. Yet these ascetical practices alone do not suffice; there is also need of philosophy and science, in the sum total of which the per- fection of virtue finally consists. There is a certain Stoic element in all this, yet without the Stoics' self-sufficiency and pride; for, in the last instance, it is the help of God that is man's strength. Thus assisted by God, and making proper use of contemplation, we may realize even here on earth a sort of intuitive vision of God's perfection, which is the final aim of all true philosophy. That this teaching of Judaism, both in its purer form as found in the Palestinian group and in its somewhat modified contents as developed among the Jews of the Diaspora, would exert an influence on later Christian thought is quite obvious. " Salvation is from the Jews," said our Divine Saviour, and so likewise was the early preaching of the Gospel. The Apos- tles and first disciples of the Lord had been trained up in the doctrines of the Old Testament, and some of their im- mediate successors were deeply imbued with Hellenistic thought. Nor was there in this any great danger to the purity of the Gospel message. Outward expression of re- vealed doctrines might bear the impress of the preacher's eariy associations; forms of speech might be used that would be calculated to puzzle later generations ; certain elements of the Saviour's teaching might be emphasized and others barely stated in a casual way : but all this did not necessarily imply that the Evangel of Christ would either be coerced into the narrow compass of the Mosaic Law, or flow out unhindered into the shoreless ocean of Greek speculation. The issue DigiLizedbyGoOglc 34 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES would depend on the promised measure of divine assistance ; for if the message was divine, its subsequent propagation and conservation must depend on a help that was equally divine. In this a merely human care and human wisdom would be insufficient. What did happen will appear in the sequel. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER III NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING ON THE FUNDAMENTAL TRUTHS OF CHRISTIANITY To the general outline of revealed truths contained in the Old Testament, as given in the preceding chapter, must now be added a summary statement of the Gospel message. The two together will enable us to form a proper appreciation of doctrinal development, as it is portrayed in the History of Dc^mas. However, as this statement must necessarily be very brief, it appears advisable to confine our observations to such points of doctrine as are of greater fundamental impor- tance, and for that reason recur constantly in the preaching of the Gospel. These are Christ's own teaching on the king- dom of heaven and on the life eternal, St. Paul's doctrine on the Church of Christ, and the doctrinal data on the mys- tery of the Blessed Trinity and on the person of the Saviour, both as found in the Gospels and in the Epistles of St. Paul. The reason for thus placing St. Paul's Epistles on a level with the Gospels, and treating them as an independent source of revealed truth, lies in the fact that he received his gospel not of man, but from the revelation of Jesus Christ.^ The mes- sage which the Saviour announced personally, as recorded by the Evangelists, He also announced through Paul, whom He made " a vessel of election," A — Christ's Teaching on the Kingdom op Heaven ■ In one sense the doctrine of the kingdom of heaven runs throi^h the whole New Testament, and is set forth as clearly and fully by St. John and St. Paul as by the first three Evan- DigiLizedbyGoOglc §6 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES gelists; yet in another sense it is found almost exclusively in the SyncqJtic Gospels. St. John and St. Paul use the term, but only incidentally; they throw the Saviour's teaching on the kingdom into anotiier form, the one speakii^ of it as the life eternal and the other as the Church of Christ. The contents, as we shall see, are the same in each case; but the form differs. And it is this difference of form that makes it advisable to consider separately the three several aspects of one and the same doctrine. Hence in this first section we shall confine our remarks to the teaching of Jesus on the kingdom of heaven as recorded by the Synoptists. The doctrine of the kingdom may be said to be the funda- mental idea that underlies the Synoptic Gospels. St. Mark and St. Luke usually speak of it as the kingdom of God, and St. Matthew as the kingdom of heaven. The two expressions are identical in sense, and properly signify the reign or domi- nation of God, as appears from the Greek text. In its main outline and general concept, this doctrine of the kit^om presents an Old Testament idea, and coincides with the pro- phetic view of the Messianic reign.' Some modem critics take this kingdom, as portrayed in the Synoptic Gospels, to be exclusively eschatological in character, holding that Christ regarded its establishment as coincident with the end of time. However, the various texts bearing on the subject make it quite clear that the term is used in a threefold sense. In some passages the kingdom is obviously considered in its final consummation, as God's kingdom of the elect already in possession of their eternal reward, and in this sense it is purely eschatological. In other places it is referred to as present and established here on earth, either as including both the just and the unjust in a state of preparation, or as including only the just who here and now comply with all the conditions it im- poses ; evidently in neither of these two connections does it bear an eschatological import. It is as much a part of the actual present as is the field in which wheat and cockle are allowed to grow until the time of the harvest.* Hence the Baptist *MatL 13, a^-ja DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 37 announced it as dose at hand, and Jesus declared that it had appeared with His advent' The kingdom is first announced to the Jews, but it is in- tended for all.' Hence the Apostles must preach it to all naticms, and before the consummation of the ages the glad tidings must spread over the whole worldJ It ^all grow as a mustard seed, and pervade the life of individuals and of society as a leaven, changing the whole mass. Yet, though all are called to this kingdom, admittance into it can be secured only on certain conditions. These may be summed up as faidi in the divine message, penance for past misdeeds, attach- ment to the person of Christ, readiness to confess Him before men, an humble and docile heart, purity of morals, and help- fulness to the neighbor." The ruler of this kingdom is God ; yet not the Father alone, but also the Son. The Father is the "householder who planted a vineyard, and made a hedge round about it, and dug a press, and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen " ; but die Son " is the heir," whom the faithless husbandmen killed, yet could not deprive of " his inheritance." He was sent by the Father, and He Himself sent others, giving the " kingdom to a nation yielding the fruits thereof." • Under one aspect this kingdom is interior, the reign of justice in the hearts of men ; but it also has a social side. Christ Himself calls it an eccUsia, a church, for which He is making preparation in the estabUshment of the Apostolic col- lege. He will build it upon Peter, the Rock, who shall be its indestructible foundation. For this purpose He will give to Peter the keys of the kingdom, supreme power to bind and to loosen here on earth, in such wise that his actions shall be ratified in heaven." As the head of the Church, Peter's faith shall never fail, and he shall confirm his brethren.** With him are associated the other Apostles, who shall also receive power to tnnd and to loosen ; " they are all sent to ■ Ibid. 3, 2; 13, 9& * Ibid. 31, 33-^. • Ibid rot 5, & >" IWd. 16, 13-19. *Ibid 3B, 19. "Luke, 23, 33. ■Ibid. II, »; 5, 3-13. "Matt 18, 19- zedbyGoOglC 38 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES baptize and to teach, and they must be listened to as Jesus Himself." Admission into this Church is by baptism in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. ^* This bap- tism, together with faith, is necessary for salvation.^' Once admitted into the Church, the members thereof must partake of a Eucharistic meal, at which they eat the body and drink the blood of the Saviour, This rite is performed in obedi- ence to Christ's explicit command, and commemorates the immolation of Himself for the sins of the world." In their intercourse with one another they must be mindful of the great law of charity, loving not only their brethren and friends, but also their enemies and persecutors, bearing injur- ies gladly for Christ's sake, forgiving offenses, and readily sacrificing their own interests for the good of their neighbor. They must keep their hearts pure and detached, and be perfect as also their Heavenly Father is perfect." This is required of all, but if some wish to aim at higher things, let them sell all they have, give the price of their goods to the poor, leave father and mother, and follow the Master in voluntary pov- erty, chastity and obedience.^' Here on earth the kingdom of God, which is thus the Church of Christ, includes both good and bad, wheat and cockle ; but the day of separation will come, and this will be twofold. An individual separation takes place immediately after death, when those who have followed Dives shall be buried with him in hell, whilst those others who have suffered patiently like Lazarus shall be at peace in Abraham's bosom.^' Then there will be another separation at the end of time, a judgment of the whole world, when every one shall be re- warded or punished according to his deeds. This will be pre- ceded by a general resurrection of the dead,*" so that body and soul may share a common fate. The wicked shall go into everlasting fire, enkindled for the devil and his angels; and »»Luke, 10, t6. "Matt S. i!H8. "Matt. 28, 19. "Ibid. 19, 21. » Mark. 16, 16. »• Luke, 16. 19-21. i*Ibid. 36, 36-ag. Mibjd. 30^ 37, 38; Matt. 5, 39. DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 39 the just shall possess forever the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world.'^ B — The Life Eternal Corresponding to the kingdom of God as portrayed by the Synoptists, we find in St John's account a presentation of hfe eternal. The proper object of the mission of Jesus is not to judge the world, but to save it; to give it eternal life. " Now this is eternal life; that they may Imow thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." ^' Hence Jesus is the light, " which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world." He is to give His flesh for the life of His followers; He is the Good Shepherd who dies for His flock. All this is in accord with the command He has received from His Father. Yet no one takes His life away from Him, but He lays it down of His own free will ; and as He has power to lay it down, so has He also power to take it up again.** This eternal life is intended for all men, because " God so loved the world as to give his only-begotten Son, that who- soever believeth in him may not perish, but may have life everlasting." " But in regard to some this intention of God is not realized; for "men love darkness rather than the light," and so instead of allowing themselves to be " drawn by the Father," they follow their own will and trust in their own devices." They refuse to comply with the conditions laid down for entrance into eternal life, the chief of which is attachment to Jesus.^ They must belong to His sheepfold; they must be united to Him even as the branches are united to the vine.** In its completeness this eternal life is twofold: it begins here on earth and reaches its final perfection in heaven. In so far as it has its inception on earth, it does not consist only in the perfection of individual souls, but it also implies 4 close union with the social organization of which Christ Him- " Ibid, as, 31-45. " Ibid. 3, 16. » John, 17, 3. »• Ibid. 3, 19. »*lbid I, 9. "Tlbid. 15, 7-ia ■■Ibid. 10, vj, iS. **Ibid. \q, 14-17, 15, S-& DigiLizedbyGoOglc 40 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES self lays the foundation during His three years of public teaching. He gathers around Him twelve Apostles, whom He endows with His own authority, and sends out into the world even as he was sent by the Father." He sanctifies Himself for them, and prays that they, and all who believe through their word, may be one as He and the Father are one."" He promises them the Holy Spirit, the Paraclete, who will teach them all things and remain with them forever.^^ Hence, although He, the Good Shepherd, must go to the Father, His sheepfold shall remain. For its preservation He makes one of His Apostles His own substitute, appointing him as chief shepherd in His own stead, with the power and the duty of feeding His lambs and His sheep.*' His mission is to be continued by all the Apostles ; they are all sent to preach and to teach, to forgive and to retain sins through the Holy Spirit who is given them; but to Peter alone is the care of the whole flock entrusted. Thus the sheepfold is identical with the Church which is built on Peter. St. John's thoughts are cast in a different mold; his terms and expressions are peculiarly his own; but the contents of his doctrine are the same as that of the Synoptists, because both represent the doctrine of Christ. As no one " can enter into the kingdom of God, unless he be bom again of water and the Holy Ghost," " entrance into the Church is evidently obtained through baptism; and once admitted into it, the members thereof must " eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood," or they shall not have life in them.'* Furthermore, they must all believe in Jesus, hear the voice of the Shepherd and follow him, so that there may be but one fold and cme shepherd. Under these condi- tions the Church is open to all, and any one may enter and remain in the fold ; for besides the Jews, the Good Shepherd has other sheep ; them also must He bring."" On the other hand, those who will not comply with the »• Ibid. 20i 21. *» Ibid. 3, 5- ■» Ibid. 17, 4-25. «• Ibid. 6, 54-64. » Ibid. 16, 13-15. " Ibid. 10, 3-16. "Ibid. 21, 15-17; ao, 21-23. DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 41 conditions here laid down, and whose works are evil, by that very fact judge themselves.'* In this sense the judgment, which is to follow death, already begins in the present life, and determines each one's condition in the world to come. But this judgment will be followed by another one at the end of time, when all shall rise again and receive the recompense of their mortal deeds. For " the hour cometh, wherein all that are in their graves shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that have done good things, shall come forth unto the resurrection of life; but they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of the judgment." " This final retribu- tion will be the full development of each one's condition here on earth: for the just the full possession of life in conse- quence of their union with Christ; for the wicked, death and God's wrath always standing against them.'® C — St. Paul's Doctrine on the CnintcH of Christ Christ's teaching on the kingdom of heaven and on the life eternal, as recorded by the Synoptists and St John respectively, represents the Church as an institution still in the course of formation. It had its beginning indeed during the Saviour's life time, in as much as the foundation was then laid and the necessary powers were either promised or actu- ally conferred ; but it was to stand forth as a complete oi^ni- zation only after He had ascended to the Father. Then the Holy Ghost came down upon the Apostles, as had been prom- ised by Jesus, and the Church entered upon her divine mis- sion of saving the world. It is under this aspect that St. Paul speaks of the Church of Christ. In many respects his presentation of the subject coincides closely with that of St. John, in as much as he emphasizes the intimate union that exists between the Churdi and her Founder. He speaks of her as the body of Christ, the spouse of the Saviour, made immaculate by His cleansing blood.'" Jesus is her head, the center of her unity, the source of her DigiLizedbyGoOglc 42 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES organic life.*" Then, too, the Spirit of Truth abides in her, and makes her the pillar and groundwork of truth.*' In the " one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Gentiles, whether bond or free ; and in one Spirit we have all been made to drink." *' Hence the Holy Spirit, together with Christ, is the source of life to the Church and the bond of union among the faithful. The Church is an organized society, in which there are many ministries, but they all come from the same Spirit.*' Men of approved virtue are constituted to govern each particular com- munity of believers. Some of them are overseers or bishops, others presbyters, others deacons.** The bishops, either by themselves or together with the presbyters, must instruct the faithful, preach sound doctrine, and rebuke the gainsayers ; *" they must also ordain fit candidates for these sacred functions by the imposition of hands.*" Repeated mention is made of certain sacred rites, all more or less intimately connected with the social life of the Church. The first of these is baptism which symbolizes the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and effects a spiritual regen- eration in the soul*' This is followed by the imposition of hands, whereby the Holy Spirit is imparted to the newly baptized.** Then there is the Eucharistic meal, which is the body and blood of Jesus, is commemorative of His death, and can be worthily received by those only who have proved themselves.** The breaking of the bread and the blessing of the chalice is also a sacrifice; for the Christians have an altar whereof those may not eat who serve idols."" The ordination of bishops and presbyters constitutes a spe- cial religious rite, which consists in the imposition of hands by the presbyterium or by the Apostles, and imparts grace for the discharge of the various functions of the sacred ministry.** " Ibid. 4, IS, Hi- also Note Y, 488 sqq. "I Tim. 3, 15. »Tit. r, 9; I Tim. 5, 17. «I Cor. 12, 1% "Tit I, S; I Tim, 4, 13, 14. •» Ibid, ra, s-3a *"> Rom. 6, 3-1 1 ; Ephes. 2, 5, 6. ** Phil. I, I ; Acts, 19, 6. In re- " Acts, ig, 16. Brd to St, Paul's teachine on the *•! Cor. 11, 20-34. erarchy, cfr. F. Prat La The- witij. jo, 16-21. ologie de Saint Paul, I, 475-^82; '^I Tim. 4, 14. DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 43 Christian marriage is represented as being of a sacred charac- ter. The union of hust^d and wife is a symbol of the union of Christ with His Church. In this sense it is a great sacra- ment"* Such a marriage cannot be dissolved except by death : this is the Lord's command."* Although matrimony is thus a holy state, yet perfect continence and virginity are preferable to it; and so is widowhood; but neither of them is obliga- tory."* In their daily life and in their relation to one another, the members of the Church must walk as the children of light, giving thanks always for all things, and being subject to cme another in the fear of Christ. Women must be subject to their husbands, as to the Lord; children must obey their parents in the Lord ; servants must yield obedience to their masters from the heart ; masters must treat their servants as children of the same Heavenly Father.'"' The Church is the kingdom of God on earth, and this king- dom shall have its completion in the second coming of Christ. When that will be no one knows, but the time is short; we must use the world as if we used it not, for its figure passes away." However, before the second advent of Christ, the man of sin, the son of perdition, shall appear, who will try to usurp the place of God." Then, at the appointed time, the Lord shall come down from heaven, and at the voice of the Ardiangel and at the sound of the trumpet. Antichrist shall be exterminated, and the dead shall rise again, some in glory and others in corruption. Thereupon follows the judg- ment, which shall be presided over by Jesus Christ, Every one shall be judged according to his works."* The just shall inherit the kingdom of the Father, which will be at the same time an inheritance and a reward; whilst the wicked receive wrath and sorrow, death and destruction, as the just retribu- tion of their iniquity."* They shall be assailed by the Lord •» Ephes. s, 25-32. " II Thes. a, 3-12. "I Cor. 7, 10, II. "I Thes. 4, 15; i, 10; II Thes. "Ibid. 7, 7, 35-^4a 3, 8; Rom. 2, 5-16. "Ephes. 5, 18-21; 6, 24. "Rom. 8, 17; 2, 5-9; 6, 21. ••I Cor. ?, 29-31. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 44 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES and His power with an avenging fire. Their torments, as well as the happiness of the just, shall be everlasting.*** D — The Blessed Trinity and the Pebson of Christ In the Synoptic Gospels only one explicit reference to the Blessed Trinity is recorded as made by Christ, and this is con- tained in His commandment to baptize in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.'^ However, the divinity of the Son is taught in other texts, as will be shown below; and that of the Holy Ghost seems clearly implied in the passages where He is spoken of as being sinned against and as inspiring the disciples."' Hence, as the oneness of God is assumed all through the Gospels and even explicitly stated, the elements of the mystery are found in the Synoptists in- dependently of the baptismal formula. St. John, on the other hand, is quite clear on the point, although he does not formulate the doctrine in express terms. Christ is the only-begotten of the Father; the Father is the source of the Son's being and action, the Father and the Son know one another; they remain one in the other, to both the same honor is paid, and they are one.** In this there is at the same time distinction and identity : distinction of persons and identity of nature. The same position is assigned to the Holy Ghost. He proceeds from the Father and receives from the Son, and this because everything that is the Father's is the Son's also. Both send Him, yet He is not separated from them; for the Father and the Son accompany Him and dwell together with Him in the hearts of the faithful."* He is truly a divine person; for He is the Spirit of Truth, who instructs the Apostles, and takes Christ's place in their regard."' St. Paul does not state the mystery of the Blessed Trinity in so many words, but he implies it with sufficient clearness. There is one God, the Father of all, and with Him associated in power and glory is His own Son, who is His image, being "I Cor. 9, 25; Rom. a, 7; s, 21; "John, s, ift a6; 10, 15; 8, ag; II ThM. I, 8, 9. S. 23: 10, 30. " Matt 28, 19. ••Ibid IS, 36,14,15; 16, a6j 14, 33. "Marli^ 13, 11; Luke, i<^ 10, u. Mltud. 14, i6v I?; 15, 26. DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 45 in the form of God, and by whom all things are made." With the Father and the Son is enumerated also the Holy Spirit, who dwells in our souls, and who prays in us. He knows the secrets of God, and is God. He is at the same time the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ; is sent by the Father and belongs to the Son.*' Hence the Trinitarian formula: "The grace of our I-ord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God, and the communion of the Holy Spirit be with you all.'^ R^arding the person of Christ two points are of special importance in this connection; His Messiahship and His divinity. The Synoptists emphasize the first and imply the second; St John emphasizes the second and clearly states the first; whilst St. Paul brings out both points, though more or less incidentally, representing Christ primarily as the world's Redeemer, who restored man to the high estate from which he had fallen through sin. As recorded by the Synoptists, Christ presented Himself from the very opening of His public career as the Messias foretold by the Prophets; but at first He did so guardedly, forbidding all open proclamation of the fact."° Later on He freely accepted and also openly claimed the title, telling the disciples of the Baptist that in Him were fulfilled the predic- tions of the Prophets, as the signs and wonders which He wrought abundantly proved.'" Then He pointed out to His Apostles that one of them would betray Him, that He should be delivered into the hands of the Goitiles, be put to death, but that on the third day He would rise again, as had been foretold in the Old Testament.'* Thus whatever befalls Him, whatever He says and does, is in fulfilment of the Prophets. His mission is to save what has perished, to give His hfe as a ransom for many. His blood is the blo*^ of the New Covenant, shed for many unto the remission of sins." ••Rom. 8, 33; CoL i, 15-17; PhiL ••Luke, 4, 16-21; Mark, li, la a, 6. "Matt ir, 3-5. "I. Cor. 3, 16; 6, 19; Rom. 8, "Mark, 8,31. Ill 4, 6. i*Luk«^ 24, 44-47; Matt a6, aS. ••II Cor. 13, 13. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 46 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES As Christ thus claimed to be the Messias, so did He also claim to be the Son of God. It is true, in the Synoptic Gos- pels He is nowhere recorded as assuming the full title of His own initiative ; but it is stated that He freely accepted it from others.'" Twice, moreover. He styles Himself the Son, and He invariably calls God His Father.^* That this title was, in the mind of Jesus, not merely Messianic, but implied over and above a divine filiation in the natural sense of the term, is indeed nowhere stated in so many words ; but that this was really the case appears to a certainty from His manner of speaking and from the claims which He persistently ad- vanced. A few examples will suffice to make clear the truth of this statement. Thus almost at the beginning of His public career, in the Sermon on the Mount, He acts as an independent lawgiver, whose authority is equal to that of Jahve.'" Later on He places Himself far above all Patriarchs and Prophets and holy men of old; they are merely Jahve's servants, whilst He is His Son and heir,'" He claims a higher origin than that implied in His descent from David, a greater glory than that of the Temple." He is Lord of the Sabbath, and He puts Himself in the very place of Jahve as the spouse of men's immortal souls.''* He gives the keys of the kingdom of heaven to whom He pleases,^' and points to Himself as the object of men's highest aspirations, in whom alone they can find rest for their souls.** He is the Absolute and Supreme Good, for whose sake men must sacrifice all that is nearest and dearest to them.*^ He is the Supreme Judge, who will pass sentence on all in accordance with what they have done or failed to do to Himself.*' In speaking of God as His Father, He entirely separates Himself from His disciples and from the rest of mankind : He says, " My Father and your Father," but never, "Our Father." No one knows the Son except the Father, "Matt 11^ i6, 17; Mark, 14 61, "Ibid. la, 8; Mark. 2, iS. "Matt 16, 19; 18, 18. "Ibid 11, aS, 20. •> Ibid. 10, 33-3&. " Ibid 25, 31-4& DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 47 and no one knows the Father except the Son : their knowledge is one, and so is their nature."^ All this, as seems quite obvi- ous, admits of only one reasonable interpretation — that Christ claimed to be true God and wished to be accepted as such by men. In the Gospel of St. John Christ's claim of the Messiahship ai^>ears throughout identified with His statement that He is the Son of God, sent into this world " that whosoever believeth in him may not perish, but have life everlasting," He is first and foremost a divine Messias, who was in the be^nning with God as the eternal Word, but in time was made flesh and dwelt amongst us.** Before Abraham was He is ; He was in glory with the Father before the world was made.*" He comes from heaven and goes back to heaven ; yet the Father is greater than He.** He is sent into the world, there to fulfill His mission; but also to speak, to act, and to judge in His own name.*^ His mission is that of the Good Shepherd, who lays down His life for His sheep.*" St. Paul, as already stated, represents Christ primarily as the promised Redeemer, who delivers the world from sin. Through Adam all have been constituted sinners, through Christ all are made just.*' With Him comes the liberation from the Law; He is the promise that gladdened the hearts of the fathers. He is of our race and blood, true man, made of woman, of the fathers according to the flesh ; *" like us in all things, sin alone excepted, subject to our infirmities, and therefore capable of compassion in our regard."* Nor is He simply an individual man; He is the representative of our race in reference to the redemption. He is the second Adam, who is from heaven heavenly, whilst the first Adam was of the earth earthy; and through Him we all shall become heavenly.*" But further, this Christ is more than man : He existed before He appeared on earth, and took part in the creation of the ••Ibid. II, 27; Luke, 10, 2a. ••Ibid. 10, 17, i& ■*John, I, I, 14- »»Rom. s, 12-21. ••Ibid, 8, 58; 17, S. •*Ibid. 5, 12-19, •• Ibid. 6, 63, 33, 51 ; 14, aS. "i Hebr. 2, 17; 4, 15; 7, at •» Ibid. 8, a6; 10, 33, 37. •» I Cor. 15, 45-*). DigiLizedbyGoOglc 48 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES world. He is the Son of God, God's own proper Son, the first- bom, the heir of all thit^s, superior to the angels, who must adore Him. He is the brightness of the Father's glory, the figure of His substance, without beginning and wiSiout end of days." Before His coming He existed in forma Dei, so that He needed not jealously guard His equality with God, as if He had obtained it by robbery; it was His by nature, since He is over all things God blessed forever.** As the representative of the human race, Christ is made sin for our sake that in Him we may become the justice of God."' He is the price of our ransom, the means of propitia- tion, in which we have a share since we are included in Him."* Yet this reconciliation is entirely gratuitous on the part of God, in as much as Jesus is a gratuitous gift to our race, and in Jesus God is reconciling the world to Himself.*' This work of restoration culminates in the death of Jesus : sin is crucified in Him, and therefore also in us who are included in Him. He is thus our true High Priest, who offers Himself as a victim for our redemption. His death is a most efiicacious sacrifice, which needs to be offered but once.'* It cleanses not from legal impurities only, as did the sacrifices of the Old Law, but from sin and guilt. It frees us from the dominion of Satan, gives us access to the throne of mercy, and bestows upon us the Messing of divine grace.** It is offered for all men, extends to all times, and is perpetuated in heaven, where Jesus intercedes for us.*" In Christ and in His death, the Levitical priesthood and sacrifices have come to an end. Further still, Christ not only died for us, but He also rose from the dead and with Him we arise to a new life. This new life has its inception in baptism; then it works through faith, which makes us sharers in His justice and merits."* Faith is the substance of thin^ to be hoped for, the evidence "Rom. 8, 32; Col. I, IS, 17; Cor. 5. 'ft Hcbr. I, 1-12; 3, 6; 7, 3, B, 16, 18. "Rom, 3, 25; Hebr. 10, 7-10; 7, "Phii. 2, 6-9; Rom, 9, S. 27; 9, 12, 15, •»Rom. 3, 2S; 6,6; I Cor. 5, ig. »»Ibid. 10, 9; 4, 6. "Ibid. ii^Ibicl. 2, g; 9, aS. 26; 9. n, 12, "Rom. 5, 8; Ephes. i, 3-6; II >"Rom. 6, 3-8; 3, 22-aS. DigiLizedbyGoOglc NEW TESTAMENT TEACHING 49 of things that appear not Without faith it is impossible to please God and be saved. Those who lose it have no further h(^, as they have no further sacrifice of reconciliation.'"" This faith, however, is not merely speculative ; it is eminently practical, a complete surrender of man to God. It is, there- fore, not opposed to works in general, but only to those works from which faith is absent "My just man liveth by faith." "« Finally, as the transgression of the first Adam implanted in our flesh the principle of sin, so the restoration wrought by the second Adam implants in our soul the principle of sanctiflcation. This principle is the Spirit of God and of Christ.'"* He is the Spirit of grace and of charisms. By grace we are made intrinsically just before God."*" Grace is also a principle of action, by which we overcome temptation, do God's work, and merit the crown of eternal justice."' Be- sides, this Spirit of God and of Christ though dwelling and worlnng chiefly in the soul, to which He renders the testimcmy of divine sonship, extends His influence also to the body; He consecrates it as His temple, and will one day raise it from the grave."' As the reader may have noticed, on several points of doc- trine St Paul goes considerably beyond the explicit teaching of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels. This seems especially true in regard to the consequences of Adam's fall, the rise and power of concupiscence, the transmission of original sin, the nature of the atonement, the regeneration of human nature, the scope and operation of grace; although these points have barely been touched uptwi in the above summary of his teaching on redemption. It must be noted, however, that in all this there is nothing really new. What the Gospels imply, he fre- quently brings out with great clearness, as was required by the conditions and circtmistances under which he wrote and »»»Hebr. 11, i, 6; 6, 4-8. '"Rom. 5. 16-31; Ephea. 3, H WRom. I, S, 171 6, t6, 17; G. 3i. 3, 16-3, n. >»«Rom. 7, 33^; I Cor. 15, ro; iMRom. 8, 4-ia; I Cor. 3, 14, 15; H Tim. 4, 7. & G. s, 16. >"I Cor. 3, 16; 6, 19; Rom. 8, DigiLizedbyGoOglc 50 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES preached. His initial declaration that his preadiing was " by the revelation of Christ," and that he had not received his message from men, was not meant as a justification of any departure in his doctrine from the Gospel message announced by the other Apostles. Hence his boldness in declaring ana- thema any one who should presume to preach a gospel dif- ferent from his own. Hence, too, the readiness with which James and C^has and John gave him the right hand of fellow- ship."" "• G. I, 9. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER rV CHRISTIAN UFE IN APOSTOLIC TIMES : THE FIRST AP- PEARANCE OF HERESIES Faithful to their Master's command, the Apostles waited for " the power of the Holy Ghost " and then " were witnesses unto Jesus in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the earth." Assisted by the Holy Spirit, they taught whatever He had commanded them, and thus spread the glad tidings of salvation through the name of Jesus. Their earliest missionary preaching developed this thesis : Jesus is the promised Messias ; in Him all the proph- ecies are fulfilled ; He died for the salvation of sinners, was buried, rose again from the dead, ascended into heaven, and on the last day He shall come to judge all mankind. He is the Ruler and the Lord : Him all must accept, believe in, and worship. All must do penance, be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins, and then they shall receive the Holy Ghost.^ These glad tidings were first announced to the Jews, but by a special revelation Peter was reminded that they must also be preached to the Gentiles." As head of the Church, he acted independently in the matter, but not without being severely criticised by certain narrow-minded converts from Judaism." Later on it was especially St. Paul who devoted himself to the conversion of Gentile nations. Concerning the conditions on which converts from heathenism were to be admitted, there was at first a diversity of opinion, but a council of the Apostles and elders decided that the ordinances of the Mosaic Law need not be observed.* However, a Judaizing party caused DigiLizedbyGoOglc 52 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES considerable trouble, and it was iMgely due to the determina- tion of Sl Paul that the decisions given at Jerusalem were carried into effect. The gradual formation of the Church and the development of the hierarchy proceeded in conformity with the funda- mental ideas outlined in the preceding chapter. Admittance into the Church could be obtained only through baptism, and this presupposed faith and penance." Baptism was followed by imposition of hands, whereby the Holy Ghost was ccwn- municated.' The faithful persevered in prayer and in the breaking of bread.^ In Jerusalem they at first practiced com- munity of goods, and in all places they were mindful of the poorer brethren. For the service of Uie poor seven deacons were chosen by the faithful, and then consecrated for their work by the Apostles.^ Some of them also preached the Gospel and baptized converts ; but they could not communicate the Holy Spirit by the imposition of hands. This was re- served to the Apostles.' If any of the faithful fell sick, the presbyters were called in, to pray over the sick man and to anoint him with oil in the name of Jesus, that he might obtain relief in his sickness and also the forgiveness of his sins.^* For the continuance of the Apostolic work, men of approved virtue were constituted presbjrters by the imposition of hands, and thereby the Holy Ghost made them guardians of the flock.^* As regards the instruction of converts before baptism, the Acts of the Apostles and the Letters of St. Paul make it suf- ficiently clear that this was in the beginning of a somewhat compendious and general character. Thus, when it ts stated that after the first sermon of St. Peter " as many as received the word were baptized," and " there were added in that day about three thousand souls," *' the inference is that faith in the most fundamental doctrines of the religion of Jesus and a ready will to observe His commandments were then and ■Ibid, a, 38, 4i; ^ 36^261 •IWd. 8, 14. •Ibid. % 17, lo; ift S, 6. "Jas. 5, 14 15. 'Ibid a 43, 46; aoi II. "Acts, 20, aS. •lbia.6.1-4. "Acts. I. 41- DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHRISTIAN UFE IN APOSTOLIC TIMES 53 there deemed sufficient for admission into the Church. Yet from this it does not follow that the first Christians had only a vague and imperfect idea of the contents of their faith. For it must be remembered that the whole Gospel was preached to them, and however limited their knowledge of Christian truths might be at the time of their baptism, it was certainly very much extended and perfected as soon as the opportunity for this was offered. In fact, it was precisely from Ae preach- ing of the Apostles that our present Gospds originated, and therefore their contents must have been known to the Chris- tians of the Apostolic age. Faith and good will were in the earliest times undoubtedly considered sufficient for baptism, but baptism was only the beginning of Christian life. Nor must it be forgotten that these first converts came from Judaism, and were already instructed in nearly all the essen- tials of the faith. Their acceptance of the Messias, as preached by the Apostles, made flieir faith Christian. No doubt, occasionally pagans also were received in the same vray, but as a general rule their instruction previous to bap- tism was more thorough. St. Paul's practice of tarrying for a considerable time in each new church he founded, as well as his letters to the different Christian commimi- ties, bears ample witness to this. Along what lines these instructions proceeded, may, aside from the Letters them- selves, be gatiiered from the Apostles' Creed, which we know to have been used at the banning of the second century as a profession of faith before baptism. It is indeed not certain that this Creed was composed by the Apostles themselves, although there was an early tradition to that effect; never- theless, as the most competent critics admit, it certainly grew out of an Apostolic practice. In its most ancient form it reads as follows: " I believe in one God, the Father Almighty ; and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Saviour, bom of the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, crucified under Pontius Pilate, and buried. He rose again on the third day from the dead, ascended into heaven, sitteth at the right hand of the Father; from whence He shall come to judge the living and the dead; and DigiLizedbyGoOglc 54 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES in the Holy Ghost, the Holy Church, the forgiveness of sins, and the resurrection of the body." *' As is quite obvious, this Creed is divided into three articles, which correspond to the three divine names in the baptismal formula. The first article contains a statement of the candi- date's belief in one God, the author of all things; the second epitomizes the whole Gospel history; whilst the third, pro- fessing faith in the Holy Ghost, is ccmipleted by a brief men- tion of the Church, the forgiveness of sins through baptism, and the resurrection of the body. Used as a profession of faith in the baptismal rite, it served at the same time as a re- capitulation of the catechetical instructions which had been given to the neophytes. Hence it gives us a fair insight into the general scope and contents of these instructions. With this general outline of Apostolic teaching before us, and calling to mind what was said in the first and second chapters about the condition of the Jewish and Gentile world at the time of Christ, we can form some idea of what conver- sion to Christianity meant in those early days. For converts from paganism there was opened up an entirely new world. The gods and goddesses of their erstwhile Pantheon were for- ever dethroned, making way for the one true God, who was to be adored in spirit and in truth. There were to be no further incantations, divinations, and offerings of material victims in sacrifice; but in their stead succeeded hymns and canticles, and the one clean oblation once offered for the redemption of the world. The attainment of riches and the enjoyment of pleasures were no longer to constitute life's chief purpose; for the world and all its passing show were to be regarded as a place and condition of exile, whose one object must ever be to make preparation for the coming of the Lord. Truly a star had risen out of Jacob, whose radiance enlight- ened the dwdlers in the shadows of Uie valley of death. But even for converts from Judaism there was opened up a much wider horizon than they had ever dreamt of whilst still groaning under the yoke of the Law. They still retained "Cit. Bardenbewcr, Altkirch. Lit I, 6S-76; I^troL 17, tS; Tixeront, H. C. 1, 143. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHRISTIAN LIFE IN APOSTOLIC TIMES 55 their ancient watchword, " Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God," but with this one God was associated in their new belief His only-begotten Son, who dwelt on the very pinnacle of divinity. There could be no thought in their mind that He was divine in a wider sense, as were the deified heroes of Greece and Rome; or that His generation from the Father was on a par with that of the old gods of Olympus whose genealogies were well known. Whether their instruc- tions had been received from James or John or Peter, it mat- tered not: Jesus Christ was put before them as God's own Son, the eternal Word, true God, by whom all things were made. And then there was the Holy Ghost, the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, the Spirit of God and of Christ, in whose name, together with that of the Father and of the Son, they had received the remission of their sins in the sacred laver of regeneration. He, too, must be reverenced with equal honor. Yes, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God, but in that one God is the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost, each of them identical with God and yet in some mys- terious way each one distinct from the others. In this was presented to them a mystery of the inner life of the Godhead which perhaps even those among them who were most con- versant with Jewish theology had barely so much as suspected. And so were their minds raised to loftier heights in the worship which this Triune God claimed as acceptable to Him from His children on earth. The Temple worship with its multifarious sacrifices of sheep and goats and oxen, and its many sprinklings of blood, was set aside as superseded by the one great sacrifice of the New Covenant, wherein they were nourished with the body and blood of their God Redeemer. Only in the accidental accompaniment of prayers and hymns, of reading and exhortation, did they find themselves in an atmosphere they were familiar with from their recollection of the Synagogue. Even through this there breathed a different spirit, less narrow, less subservient to the letter of the sacred text, but the material part was practically the same. Their own holy PatriaTchs were placed before them as examples of Christian virtue, their own beautiful Psabns were recited as JigiLizedbyGoOglc 56 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Giristian prayers. This was a precious heirloom which pre- served to them their glorious past, and, in the comments that followed, this past was dwelt upon in order to direct their hopes to a still more glorious future. Then, too, the monotony of their work-a-day life was as heretofore relieved by the Sab- bath rest, although at an early date the following day, or Sunday, seems to have been devoted to divine service. In all this they had a decided advantage over their fellow converts from paganism, whose whole religious life had to be placed on a new basis. A further widening of outlook was experienced by converts from Judaism in reference to their social relations. Hitherto, even if domiciled in Gentile lands, their social intercourse was practically limited to those of their own nation. They were the chosen people, and intimate contact with strangers begot in them a certain sense of defilement, even apart from the prescriptions and prohibitions of the Law. Hence wherever they finally settled down in their wanderings over the Empire, they forthwith formed a community within a community, gov- erned by its own customs and largely also by its own laws. But now they were taught that in Christ Jesus there was neither Jew nor Gentile, neither bond nor free, and that even strangers must be loved and treated as children of the same Father in heaven. However, this did not cause so violent a wrench as might at Brst sight appear; for the idea of a chosen people was instinctively transferred from the Jewish nation to the followers of Christ, whom St. Peter had already desig- nated as " a chosen generation, a kingly priesthood, a holy nation, a purchased people." Hence, although there was some opposition in the Palestinian community, there soon sprang up a new Israel, whose children, gathered from all parts of the Empire, were quickened by the same faith, sustained by the same hope, bound together by the same charity, and guided in their aspirations and practices by the universally aclmowl- edged authority of those whom Christ had sent to announce the glad tidings of salvation. It was the Infant Church, which had made its advent in the silence of the night. On the other hand, much greater difficulties were experi- DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHRISTIAN UFE IN APOSTOLIC TIMES 57 enced by converts from paganism in readjustu^ their so- cial relations. For them to become Christians was, in this respect, a most momentous step. It practically meant entire separation from ordinary life. For pagan society was so permeated by superstition, immorality, and idolatrous prac- tices, that neither theaters, nor public games, nor ordinary social functions could in conscience be frequented by one who professed to be a follower of Christ. These, in fact, con- stituted the works of Satan and his pomps, which every one was called upon to renounce on being received into the Church. In many instances this would mean disruption of hfe long friendships, breaking up of the home, and exclusion from the common civilities of life. In time, too, it would lead to diffi- culties with the State; for although the Jews, because of their acknowledged national privileges, were allowed to limit their religious practices to the worship of Jahve, such a favor was not granted to Christian converts from paganism. In the matter of worship pagan gods had always been extremely accommodating; and hence,, whatever might be their name or position, their clients were called upon, at least occasionally, to take part in the various functions of the State religion. What this view of the matter, when practically enforced, meant to the Christians, later persecutions will amply show. Such, then, was the life of those who received the word, and who tried in the simplicity of their hearts to become other Christs. But there were many others who heard the word but received it not ; to whom tiie Saviour referred when He said : " The kingdom of heaven is likened to a man that sowed good seed in his field. But while men were asleep, his enemy came and over-sowed cockle among the wheat, and went his way. And when the blade was sprung up. and had brought forth fruit, then appeared also the cockle," ** How truly pro- phetic this parable of our Blessed Saviour must appear to one who studies the spread of the Gospel I The message contained therein was indeed good seed; it was sown diligently in the field of the world; it sprang up and brought forth excellent »Matt. 13, a6. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 58 THE FraST THREE CENTURIES fruit : but mixed up with it appeared from the very first much cockle — doctrines of men's making, false philosophical specu- lations, " fables and genealogies without end, which minister questions rather than the edification of God which is in faith." The saying of St. Paul, that heresies must needs be,'" was fully verified during his own life time and that of the other Apostles. It is in these heretical vagaries that Hellenic specu- lations and Oriental mysticism have left their traces, rather than in the genesis of Christian thought and in the develop- ment of Christian doctrines. A brief summary of them, as they appeared in Apostolic times, will be helpful in clearing up the movements of orthodox thought. These early aberrations seem to have sprung from two opposite tendencies; one of which was to perpetuate the ob- servance of the Mosaic Law in the New Covenant, the other to force the Gospel contents into ready-made systems of phi- losophy, partly Greek and partly Oriental in character. The former tendency gave rise to Judaic-Christianity, the latter to Gnosticism. Of Judaic-Christianity, however, it is not neces- sary to treat in this connection, since, as an active force, it was short-lived and caused no real doctrinal disturbances. Its first advocates were substantially orthodox in faith, and when later on heretical elements found their way into its teaching, the party exercised only an insignificant local influence. Cerinthus indeed, who denied the divinity of Christ, and to refute whom St. John is said to have written his Gospel, drew after him a certain following, but his influence appears to have been transient. The last remnants of this heterodox Judaic-Christianity are found among the Ebionites and Naza- renes, who in the second and third centuries led an inactive existence in Syria and Palestine, and then disappeared from history. Gnosticism, on the other hand, which appeared only in germ during Apostolic times, played subsequently a rather impor- tant part in doctrinal development. It seems to have first made its appearance under a Judaizii^ guise, and as such DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHRISTIAN LIFE IN APOSTOLIC TIMES 59 reference is made to it in St. Paul's Epistle to the Colossians, in the Pastoral Epistles, in the second Epistle of St. Peter and that of St. Jude, and also in the Epistles and Apocalypse of St. John. Somewhat later it is again referred to in the Letters of St. Ignatius and SL Polycarp. In his Epistle to the Colossians, St Paul first draws a mag- nificent portrait of Christ the Redeemer, the Son of God, " in whom we have redemption through his blood, the remission of sins: who is the image of the invisible God, tiie first-bom of every creature : for in him were all things created in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones, or domina- tions, or principalities, or powers : all things were created by him and in him : and he is before all, and by him all things consist." Then he adds : " Now this I say, that no man may deceive you by loftiness of words." What he understood by this " loftiness of words," he explains by his further warnings : " Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy, and vain deceit; according to the tradition of men, according to the elements of the world, and not according to Christ" " Let no man therefore judge you in meat or drink, or in respect of festival days, or of the new moon, or of the sabbaths, which are a shadow of the things to come, but the body is Christ's. Let no man seduce you, willing in humility, and religion of angels, walking in the things which he hath not seen, in vain puffed up by the sense of his Besh, and not holding the head, from which the whole body, by joints and bands being sup- plied with nourishment and compacted, groweth unto the in- crease of God. If then you be dead with Christ from the elements of this world; why do you yet decree as living in the world? Touch not. taste not, handle not: which all are unto destruction by the very use, according to the precepts and doctrines of men. Which things have indeed a show of wis- dom in superstition and humility, and not sparing the body, not in any honor to the filling of the flesh." " From this it appears that there were various tendencies at work to depreciate the person of Christ to set aside the re- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 6o THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES demption which He wrought, and to cause disunion in the Church. The angels seem to have been placed above Jesus; salvation was made dependent on various unseemly practices, in one way or another tending to an abuse of the body; and the purity of Christian worship was more or less destroyed by the observance of feasts, new moons, and sabbaths. No defi- nite doctrinal system is indicated as the source of these hetero- dox practices, yet in the light of later developments one can readily detect in them the beginnings of the second-century Gnostic heresies. In his Pastoral Letters the Apostle is even more severe in condemning these disturbers of the Christian communities. He points to Hymenseus, Philetus, and Alexander the c(^)per- smith, as drawing after them men of "itching ears," and especially women, upsetting their minds with questions as silly as they are subtle, and disseminating Jewish fables. They inculcate abstinence from marriage and from certain kinds of food, and teach that there is no other resurrection than that from sin. Morally these men are utterly corrupt, seeking only for gain. " They profess that they know God, but in their hearts they deny Him, being abominable, and incredulous, and to every good work reprobate." " Those referred to in the Epistles of St. Peter and St Jude seem to have been of the same kind : for they " deny our only Master and Lord Jesus Christ," despise authority and reject the doctrine of the judgment and the Lord's coming. Their morals are infamous: they blaspheme what they do not under- stand, and are beastly in their conduct.*" St. John, when speaking of these or similar heretics, charac- terizes their doctrine as " the depth of Satan," They claim to be apostles and Jews, but they are of the synagogue of the devil. They teach chiefly unchastity, and the lawfulness of eating meats offered to idols.** In his First Epistle he says there are many antichrists, who have come from the ranks of Christians. They deny that Jesus is the Christ and the Son. They are liars: and by denying the Son, they have not the' "Jude, 4, 8, lo; II Pet a, 3-14. »Apoc3,ft 14^5; 3,9- DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHRISTIAN LIFE IN APOSTOLIC TIMES 6l Father. "Every spirit which confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God : and every spirit that dissolveth Jesus, is not of God ; and this is the Antichrist." "* In what sense precisely these false teachers denied that "Jesus is the Christ and the Son," and that "Jesus Christ is come in the flesh," is not clear; but the most probable infer- ence is that they regarded Him as purely human, and thereby denied the doctrine of the Incarnation. How these first at- tempts of turning Christian thought into heterodox diannels, and incidentally also of corrupting the purity of Christian morals, gradually developed into full-fledged Gnosticism, we shall have occasion to point out when studying the doctrinal development that was going on during the second century. Here are the germs. ••I John, 3, 18-33;+ 3, 3. IS. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER V THE WRITINGS AND TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS » By Apostolic Fathers, in this connection, are understood the authors of certain early Christian writings, generally orthodox in tone and teaching but not inspired, which were produced in Apostolic or sub-Apostolic times, ranging, roughly speaking, from the last decade of the first to the rniddle of the second century. The writings in question are nine in number, but the authors of only five of them are known. These are: St. Clement of Rome, St, Ignatius of Antioch, St. Polycarp of Smyrna, St. Papias of Hierapolis in Phrygia, and Hermas the brother of Pope Pius I. For the sake of clearness it seems advisable to divide our review of these rather important docu- ments into two sections. In the first we shall give some gen- eral information regarding each document, together with a brief analysis of its contents ; and in the second we shall group the dogmatic teaching of the several authors under a number of conventional headings, corresponding more or less to the treatises usually studied in our modem schools of theology, A — The Writings op the Apostolic Fathers Geographically and chronologically the writings of the Apostolic Fathers may be arranged in the following order, although some authors prefer a different arrangement: I °. The Didache; or, the Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles. — According to Bardenhewer, Funk, Zahn, Sabatier, and the majority of critics, this little treatise appeared in the last > Cf r. Bardenhewer, PatroUigy, Ftink, Patres Apostolic! ; Tixeront, r<)-43, English Translation by ThoB. History of Dogmas, I, 104. Batif- J. Shahan; Geschichte der Aitkirch- fol, Primitive Catholicism; 'DureU, lichen Littcratur, I, 76-14^; F. X. The Historic Church, 11-138. DigiLizedbyGoOglc WRITINGS OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 63 decade of the first centuiy, most likely in Palestine or Syria. It is now usually regarded as authentic, with the exception of two verses (i, 3; 2,1), which, however, have no direct dog- matic value. It seems to have been intended as a catechetical instruction, the contents of which are gathered around three main points : Moral Conduct, Church Discipline, and Escha- tology. The part dealing with moral conduct (1-6) begins witii the sentence: " There are two ways, the way of life and the way of death, but there is a great di^erence between the two." Then it is pointed out what must be done to remain in the way of life, which is practically a development of the gen- eral proposition announced in the second sentence : " This is the way of life: First, love God, who created thee; then, love thy neighbor as thyself: and whatever you do not wish that it should be done to you, neither do it to another." The exposition and practical application of this general law of Christian conduct takes up the first four chapters. In the following two, 5 and 6, the way of death is described. This is chiefly done by pointing out the various crimes against the Decalogue, and in particular those referred to by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Romans. The author ends with a warning against false teachers and tiie eating of meats that have bieen sacrificed to idols. The second part, dealing with Church discipline, be^ns with directions in reference to the administration of tpaptism, for which the Trinitarian formula is prescribed. Ordinary Chris- tian practices are touched upon in chapter 8, where the faithful are told to fast on Wednesdays and Fridays, and to recite the Lord's Prayer three times a day. Chapters 9 and 10 give the prayers to be said at the agape, during which, according to the more common interpretation, bread and wine were consecrated and distributed to the faithful. The same matter is again taken up in chapter 14, where it is enjoined to celebrate the divine mysteries on Sundays. In connection with this, the following chapter (15) contains directions for the appoint- ment of bi^ops and deacons, whose ofhce it is to offer the Christian sacniice and to instruct the faithful. Apostles, DigiLizedbyGoOglc 64 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES prophets, and teachers are also mentioned, and rules are given to distinguish the true from the false. The third part, which takes up the last chapter, treats almost exclusively of eschatological topics. The faitbful are ex- horted to come frequently together, in order to take coimsel concerning their spiritual welfare and protect themselves a^nst false prophets, of whom there will appear many in the last days. 2". The Epistle of Barnabas; or, The Pseudo-Barnabas. — The time of its composition is not certain. Bardenhewer, Funk, Hilgenfeld, Weiszaecker, Curuiingham, Lightfoot, and many others, assign as its latest possible date the close of the first century, immediately after the reign of Nerva (96-98). Hamack is non-committal. The home of the author, accord- ing to the more common view, was Alexandria in Egypt. Sotic few scholars still defend this so-called Epistle as the work of Barnabas the Apostle, but their view seems to be untenable. Aside from the introduction, the work is divided into two very unequal parts; the first comprising seventeen chapters and the second four. In the first part a decided antagonism is shown to the Old Testament, especially in its literal interpre- tation as understood by the Jews. So interpreted the autiior regards it as the work of the devU. Hence his purpose is to draw Christian believers away from it, and thus to perfect them in the true knowledge of the faith as derived from the more spiritual preaching of the Apostles. His own interpre- tation of the Old Testament is consistently allegorical, assign- ing throughout an exclusively spiritual meaning to the various ordinances and enactments of the Mosaic Law. The second part is little more than an adaptation of the Two Ways de- scribed in the Didache. 3°. The Prima Clementis; or, The First Letter of Clement to the Corinthians. — According to Eusebius (Hist Ecd. 3, 15. 34). Clement was the third successor of St. Peter, and sat in the pontifical chair from 92 to loi. There is, however, a tradition according to which he followed St Peter immedi- ately. If this latter view be adopted, tix date of the letter DigiLizedbyGoOglc WRITINGS OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 65 falls somewhere between 67 and 80. In either case it must be regarded as a first century document Modem scholars are generally agreed that this letter is a model Pastoral, simple in style, cogent in argument, and full of fatherly solicitude for the welfare of the Church. It con- sists of an introduction, two main divisions, and a recapitula- tion. In the introduction the author first expresses his regret that the late persecution prevented him from writing sooner, and then depicts in an eloquent manner the former prosperous condition of the Corinthian church and its present miserable state (1-3). In the first part (4-36) he lays down general principles, gives instructions and admonitions, warns against envy and jealousy, and strcmgly recommends the practice of humility, obedience, and penance; all of which he enfon^s by examples t^en from the Old Testament. Then, in the second part (37-61), he passes over to the troubles that are disturbing the church at Corinth. Here he treats of the hierarchy, its instituticm, mode of perpetuation, and authority over the faith- ful. He emphasizes the necessity of subjection on the part of the people, urges all to practice mutual chanty, and calls upon the disturbers to do penance and to submit. In the re- capitulation (62-65) he runs over the contents of the letter, recommends his messengers to the good will of the Corinthians, and ends with a beautiful liturgical prayer. 4". The Seven Letters of Ignatius of Anttock. — Addressed respectively, Ad Ephesios, Ad Magnesios, Ad Trallianos, Ad Romanes, Ad Philadelphenses, Ad Smymaeos, Ad Polycar- pum. St Ignatius was the second successor of St. Peter in the see of Antioch in Syria. He was martyred in Rome dur- ing the reign of Trajan (9&-117), but the exact year of his death is not known. He wrote tfie first four letters at Smyrna and the last three at Troas, whilst on his way to Rome, a captive for the faith. These letters, whose autfienticity is no longer called in ques- tion with any show of reason, are justly regarded as the most precious heirloom of Christian antiquity. They are original in thought, powerful in diction, glowing with charity, and crowded with doctrinal instruction. Regarding this last point DigiLizedbyGoOglc 66 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Cardtoal Newman did not hesitate to say that "the whole system of Catholic doctrine may be discovered, at least in outline, not to say in parts filled up, in the course of these seven epistles." ■ And this is no exaggeration. The sover- eignty and majesty of God, the Incarnation and redemption, the visibility, unity, and catholicity of the Church, the real presence of the Saviour in the Eucharist, the various means of sanctification in the Church of Christ, the virtues that must adorn the Christian life, and many other topics are dealt with in the author's own unique way. As Tixeront has well pointed out in his " History of Dogmas," the dogmatic teaching of Ignatius is chiefly gathered around three points : Christ, the Church, Christian Life.' Not that there is any attempt to present a carefully thought out theological system, but the needs of the various churches to which the author wrote called for suggestions along these lines. 5°. The Fragments of the Writings of St. Paptas. — It is commonly held that Paplas was in his youth a disciple of St John the Evangelist Later on he became bishop of Hiera- polis in Phrygia. He seems to have died about the year 150, but at what particular date he composed the book of which these few fragments have been preserved is a matter of con- jecture. What remains of his writings is of no special dog- matic value, except in so far as it gives us some information regarding the expected Millennium and the origin of the Gos- pels according to St. Mark and St. Matthew. 6°. The Letter of St. Polycarp. — Polycarp also was in his youth a disciple of St. John, and by him was made bishop of Smyrna in Asia Minor. He was martyred in his own epis- copal city, February 23, 155, in the eighty-sixth year of his life. The year before his death he had paid a visit to Rome, in order to confer with Pope Anicetus about the time when Easter should be celebrated. They did not come to an under- standing on this point, but preserved the harmony of faith and diarity. During his stay in Rome, as St. Irenieus relates, he one day met the heretic Marcion, who asked him, do you * Theology of the Seven E^ittles of St Ignatius, Historical Slcetcbes. DigiLizedbyGoOglc WRITINGS OF THE APOSTOUC FATHERS 67 know me? "Surely, I know the first-bom of Satan," was Polycarp's forceful reply, thereby indicating his abhorrence of all heresy and schism. He wrote his letter at the request of the church of Philippi in Macedonia, the presbyters of whidi had sent him word about Ignatius and in turn begged him for a copy of the mar- tyr's letters, together with a word of advice from himself. This request alone, he states, emboldened him to write to a church that had been founded by the great Apostle Paul, from whom also they had received an Epistle whilst he was laboring in distant parts. Then, after some general remarks, he ad- monishes and advises the different classes of the faithful; married women and widows, young men and women, deacons and priests. Next he refers to the sad fall of a certain Valens, a presbyter, whom avarice had led into evil ways, and he begs them that by prayer and charity they may endeavor to bring him back to the Church. In conclusion he promises to send the message of the Philippians about Ignatius to Antioch, says that he will forward to them copies of all the letters he has in his possession, and begs for further news about the martyr if perchance they should receive any. Hence the letter must have been written shortly after the martyrdom .of Igna- tius. Several passages show that the author was familiar with Clement's letter to the Corinthians. 7°. The Martyrium Polycarpi, an account of the martyrdom of the saintly bishop of Smyra. Issued by the authorities of that church, it was intended for the different Christian com- munities in Asia Minor, where Polycarp was held in great veneration. It was written in 155 or 156. The inscription runs thus: "The Church of God which is sojourning at Smyrna to the Church of God that sojourns at Philomelium, and to all the communities of the Holy and Catholic Church in every place." It contains several points of considerable dogmatic value, which will be brought out in the second part of this chapter. 8°. The Shepherd of Hermas. — Hermas composed his work at Rome during the Pontificate of his brother, Pius I, who was Pope from 140 to 154. Early writers usually identified DigiLizedbyGoOglc 68 THE FraST THREE CENTURIES him with Hermas, the disciple of St. Paul, but the Muratorian Fragment determines his date and identity as here given. This treatise has been aptly called " a vast examination of conscience of the church of Rome," because in it the author lays bare with unsparing hand the many shortcomings, vacil- lations, and sins of the Roman Christians, both lay and cleric, and proposes the serious practice of penance as the only remedy that can cure these evils. Hence in concept and pur- pose it is a treatise on penance, although incidentally other matters are also touched upon and explained. The work is apocalyptic in character, and derives its exhorta- tory force from the supposed divine inspiration of the author and the command he received from God to set forth the revela- tions vouchsafed him for the good of the Church. It consists of five Visiones, twelve Mandata, and ten Similitudines. In reference, however, to the contents, the treatise is divided into two parts. The first of these comprises the first four Visiones, in which the Church appears in the form of a matron, giving the author various instructions. The second part is made up of the fifth Visio, in which the Angel of Penance appears under the guise of a shepherd, and entrusts to him a number of mandata to be made known to the Church. It is from this last part that the whole work has received the name of " The Shepherd." 9°, The Secunda dementis; or, the Second Letter of Clem- ent to the Corinthians. — This document was by most ancient writers ascribed to Clement of Rome, but since the discovery of the entire text, or rather its publication in 1875, it has been shown to be a homily, which was produced at Corinth towards the middle of the second century. Who the author was is not known. Its contents are of a somewhat varied character, though the main purpose of the preacher seems to have been to exhort his hearers to the practice of penance. Taken geographically, these nine documents represent ahnost the whole Church during the half century to which they belong. Their importance, therefore, in reference to the History of Dogmas is obvious. It must, however, be borne in mind that not one of these writers purposes to give a complete exposition DigiLizedbyGoOglc WRITINGS OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 69 of Christian doctrine. They touch upon various doctrinal points in a merely casual way, being primarily intent upon exhorting their readers or hearers to Uie practice of virtue. Hence to infer from their writings that nothing was taught in those days except what they explicitly state, as is frequently done by modem critics, is as foolish as it is unfair. B — Teaching op the Apostolic Fathers From what sources the Apostolic Fathers drew the con- tents of their teaching is sufficiently evident from their own works. They appealed both to Scripture and tradition. Be- sides the various books of the Old Testament, of which they make frequent use, they also cite, though less frequently, nearly all the writings that are now contained in the New. In these sources they find the word of God, made known to men by the Spirit of Truth. This same Spirit also guides the Church in carrying on her divine mission of teaching all nations, so that her voice is none other than the voice of Christ. Indeed for practical purposes the teaching of the Church is supreme ; for it is she who breathes the living spirit into the dead letter of the written word, and thus makes it available for Christ's flock entrusted to her shepherding. This last thought is especially emphasized by St. Ignatius, whose efforts to ward off heresy and schism compelled him in a manner to set down his views on the matter in question. Thus writing to the church at Philadelphia, he says : " When I heard some of them saying : ' Unless I find it in the archives, that is, in the gospels, I do not believe it,' and I told them that it was so written, they answered : ' This is to be proved.' But to me Jesus Christ is the archive." • And again to the church of Ephesus: "Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is the thought of the Father, as also the bishops, all the world over, are in agreement with the mind of Jesus Christ." " And to the church at Smyrna: "Where the bishop shall appear, there let the people also be; as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." ' Thus presided over by the bishops, * Philad 8, 2. • Smym. 8, a. •Eph.3.3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc yo THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES the Church is an incorruptible teacher; for Christ has made her incorruptiWe.^ Hence " He has set up through His resur- rection, in all ages, a standard for the saints and for His followers, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, in the one body of His Church." » In the following brief summary of the teaching of the Apostolic Fathers no attempt will be made to construct any- thing like a theological system, but it will be very helpful to gather their incidental statements and elucidations of doctrinal points under the same headings that form the main divisions of systematic theology as it is taught in our schools to-day. This will enable us to make some sort of comparison between what is held at present and what we here find to have been held in the distant past. The diief points to be considered are the following : 1°. God and His Relation to the World. — AH these writers either expressly state or obviously imply that there is only one God, who transcends the world of finite beings, and has nothing in common with the false gods of pagan mythology. He is the creator of all things, the source of all blessings, the one object of all true worship. " First of all believe," says Hernias, " that there is one God, who created and consummated all that is, and out of nothing caused all things to be. He comprehends all, though He Himself is incomprehensible."" *' Do we not have one God," asks Clement, " and one Christ, and one Spirit of grace poured out upon us, and one calling in Christ? " "* " This is the way of life," explains the author of the Didache, " first, love God, who created thee." ^^ "The Prophets, inspired by the grace of Christ," writes Igna- tius, " suiiered persecutions for the purpose of convincing the incredulous that there is one God, who manifested Himself through Jesus Christ His Son." *' " This God," again argues Oement, "has established all things by the word of His majesty and by His word he can destroy them all." *' Yet T Eph. 17, I, »» Didache i, 2. ■ Smym. r, 2. ** Maen. 8, a. * Mandat I, I. ** I Clem. 37, 4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 71 He is not only a God of power, but also of merciful kindness, who is faithful to His promises and ever ready to receive back the erring.^* It is a thoroughly Christian concept, based upon the teaching of Holy Scripture. So impressed is the author with the greatness and goodness of God, that ever and anon there flows spontaneously from his pen the doxology, " to whom be glory, world without end. Amen." And what Clement, Hennas, Ignatius, and the author of the Didache thus express in so many words, all the others pre- suppose or imply as a belief that is held by every true follower of Christ. Hence when Polycarp was already bound to the stake, he ended his long prayer for friend and foe with the sublime words : " Wherefore I praise Thee in all things, I bless Thee, I glorify Thee through the eternal and heavenly high priest Jesus Christ, Thy beloved Son, through whom be glory to Thee together with Him and the Holy Spirit, now and through all future ages. Amen." This firm and universal belief of these early Christians in the unity and transcendence of God, and in His loving solici- tude for the creatures of His hands, is a point that deserves the most careful consideration in the History of Dogmas. Not only is it the foundation upon which Christianity was conceived to rest, but it also hold^ the key to the expressions used by these same writers in reference to the divinity of Christ and the Holy Spirit. Paganism confounded the deity with the world, and as a result it made gods of its own dead heroes; Christianity, on the other hand, separated God from the world, in the sense that it conceived God's being as standing absolutely by itself, and therefore as absolutely unapproach- able by any other being, no matter with what extraordinary perfections it might be endowed. Between God and man these early Christians saw a chasm that nothing could bridge. Men might become godlike, but in no sense could they become gods. It is precisely in this that men like Hamack make a funda- mental mistake. Because Christianity was propagated in 'a pagan world, therefore, they infer, its concept of God must have been more or less like tlmt of paganism.*" A mere glance **lbid. iQ, 3, 3; 9, 1- u C£r. H&nudc, DoKmciigeschichtc 1, 303, folL DigiLizedbyGoOglc 72 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES at these early writers is quite sufficient to convince one of the contrary. They one and all echo the teaching of Holy Writ: *' Hear, O Israel, the Lord thy God is one God! " 2". The Divinity of Christ — Although God was thus con- ceived as absolutely one, standing in His essence wholly apart from the world of finite beings, nevertheless the Apostolic Fathers had no hesitancy about admitting Christ also to be God. In regard to this point they do not all speak with the same clearness and precision, still, with the possible exception of Hennas, there is not one among them who gives expression to a different belief. The author of the Didache usually addresses God the Father " per Jesum puerum tuum," throu^ Jesus thy servant, but as this is a liturgical formula, no argu- ment can be drawn from it against his belief in the divinity of the Saviour.^* Nor, on the other hand, is it a conclusive proof for his belief in the Saviour's divinity when he calls Jesus the " God of David." " But when he directs his readers to baptize " in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," " the presumption is that he looked upon the Son and the Holy Spirit as associated with the Father in the same Godhead. For althoi^h this is a Scriptural formula, nevertheless we may well assume that these early Christians understood not less clearly than we do that a mere creature could not be associated with God in the solemn rite of Chris- tian initiation. Qement also, when using liturgical formulas, speaks of Christ as the servant of God,^* but in other connections he calls Him God's Son.*" Again, he associates Him and the Holy Spirit with the Father in the solemn formula of adjura- tion : " As God liveth, and the Lord Jesus Christ liveth, and the Holy Spirit, the faith and hope of the elect, so shall they who keep the commandments be in the number of those who are saved through Christ" "■ This formula, as Tixeront points out," is equivalent to the Old Testament formula, " as "Cfr. DidKhe»a,3. "Ibid. 36.4. " Ibid, m 6. » Ibid. 58, a. "■a Dri. .o& "IbiAM ■•ICtalSft*!* D,j.,.db,Googlc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 73 the Lord liveth," so that for Qement " the Lord " is identical ■with "God, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit." Moreover Clement applies to the Saviour the very explicit declaration of divinity contained in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews, thus incidentally making it quite clear in what sense he understands the term " Son of God." " Polycarp speaks of Jesus Christ as " the Son of God, our eternal pontiff,** who came in the flesh";" and hence the inference is that he regards Him as a divine being. This inference becomes quite certain when considered in the light of the doxology already cited in a preceding paragraph. For there he not only gives glory to God the Father through the Son, but accords the same glory to the Son and the Holy Spirit as to the Father,"' which he certainly could not have done imless he considered all three to be truly God. The " Martyrium Polycarpi " is more explicit. The Jews, it seems, had spread a rumor to the effect that the Smymian Christians would henceforth worship Polycarp instead of Jesus Christ. In answer to this the Christians protest that such a suggestion is absurd, because, whilst they love and venerate the martyrs as disciples and imitators of the Lord, they " adore Christ as the Son of God." " This shows how well these early Christians understood the nature of Christ's divine son- ship. They conceived it as a sonship that entitled Him to divine honors, simply because as Son He necessarily possessed the same divine nature as the Father. Pseudo-Barnabas puts the matter in an equally clear light. " Jesus," he says, " was not the son of man, but the Son of God, made manifest in the flesh. And because men would call Christ the son of David, hence David himself, fearing and understanding the error of the wicked, prophesied concerning Him : ' The Lord said to my Lord : Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thy enemies thy footstool.' . . . Behold how David calls Him his Lord, and not his son." " Moreover *■ I Gem. 36, 3-4. ■• Mar^r. 12, 3. ** Polyc 3, I ; (s a. " Ibid. 17, 3- ■*Ibid. 7, 1. **Bui]. la, ic^ 11. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 74 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES it was necessary that on His coming into this world He should assume a body; for "if He had not come in the flesh, how would men have been able to look at Him, as they cannot even look steadily at the rays of the earthly stm, which at some time shall cease to be and is merely the work of His hands ? " It was to the Son that the Father said at the beginning of the world: " Let us make man to our image and likeness." *' We find the same definite statements in the letters of Igna- tius. Not only does he call Christ " my God," ■" " our God " ; " but simply " God," and even " the God," (Tw »ebv) thus using the article, upon which modem critics place so much emphasis in this matter."' Again, he states that Jesus Christ is the Word of God,^ who " before all ages was with the Father,""* that His blood is the blood of God,'" and that He raised Himself by His own power from the dead." In fact, so definite is the author in his declaration of Christ's true divinity that it is hard to see how he might have ex- pressed himself more forcibly. And yet modem Rationalists are not satisfied. They say that in ether places Ignatius speaks of Jesus as the " Son of man and of God," as being " of God and of Mary," as " the Son of God accordit^ to the will and power of God,*' as if he attributed the Godhead of Christ to His miraculous birth, thus taking the term, " Son of God," in an improper sense. They entirely overlook the fact that according to Ignatius Jesus is the " Son of God and of man " because He is God Incarnate. The Secunda Clementis is hardly less dear and definite on this point. At the very beginnii^ of his discourse, the preacher tells his audience: " Brethren, we ought so to think of Jesus Christ as of God, as the judge of the living and the dead." ^ Hamack regards this as undecisive, suggesting that the author called Christ God simply because of His position in the economy of salvation.'* But how far this subtile dis- »• Ibid. S, lo; 5, 5. '* Ibid. 6, I. wRom. 6, 3. "Ephes. I, I. "Ibid. 3, 3; Ephes. 15, 3; Polyc "Smyrn. a, i. 8, 3. *' Ibid. I, I ; Ephes. ai^ 3. ■»Smyrn. I, I. "11 Oem. 1,1. H Magn. S^ 2. ■* Op. cit 300, notes 3. 4- DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOUC FATHERS 75 tinction was from the author's mind appears with sufficient clearness from the fact that he introduces Christ's own words with the formula : " God said," *" that he makes Jesus not only the Redeemer but also the Creator of the world,** that he refers to the Saviour as the object of our worship,*' and repeatedly speaks of Him as if He were the only Lord and God in heaven and on earth ; ** all of which, strange to say, Hamack himself admits a few lines further on. The only one of all these writers who is unsatisfactory in his statements concerning the divinity of Christ is Hernias. He holds, indeed, that the Son is truly God, but by the Son he appears to understand the Holy Spirit** The divinity of Jesus he seems to admit only in so far as the Holy Ghost has taken up His abode in Him, and as, on account of His merits, this Jesus was subsequently adopted into the divine family circle.*" Some have tried to read an orthodox meaning into all this, but the matter remains rather doubtful. Nor would this doctrinal confusion be inexplicable. For being a man of little education, as is commonly admitted, and relying largely on his own wisdom, as appears from several other places in his writings, it may be assumed that the author simply misin- terpreted the text of St. Luke, which records the descent of the Holy Ghost upon Jesus at His baptism. Neither is it difficult to understand, how, in spite of this Adoptionist view, the work should have been so highly esteemed in the early Church; because, as the author is constantly dealing in visions and parables, his heterodoxy on this particular point might easily enough escape detection, at least so long as the later Adoptionist heresy had not yet aroused the suspicion of the faithful in this regard. 3°. The Divinity of the Holy Ghost: The Blessed Trinity. — On the divinity of the Holy Ghost Hermas is most explicit. Not only does he call Him the Son of God, the adviser of tlie Father, but also the Creator of all things,** who dwells in the *" II C\tm. 13, 4. ** Simil. s. 5 ; 9. 1. i- "Ibid. I, 4. "SimiL 5, 6, 5, 6, 7; cfr. Funk, •* Ibid, a, 2, 3. PP. Apost. ed. 2, p. 541. « Ibid. 5, 1, 2; 8, 3, 4. *• SimiL 5. 6- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 76 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES faithful as the principle of sanctificatiort*^ According to Clement, He is the Spirit of God, the author of the Holy Scriptures, which therefore must be accepted as true.** He is the Spirit of grace poured out upon us all,** who is associated with the Father and the Son as a witness to the truth of God's promises.'" Ignatius refers to Him incidentally as being instrumental in the sanctification of souls,"* and as the Spirit who has come from God and knows the secrets of hearts." Twice he mentions Him together with the Father and the Son as if belonging to the same order of being."* If we add to these texts the baptismal formula contained in the Didache and the doxology of Polycarp as recorded in the " Martyrium," we have practically all that bears either on the divinity of the Holy Ghost or on the mystery of the Blessed Trinity. Modem critics usually point out that all this is so vague as to force upon us the conviction that these writers had no definite belief concerning the points in question. That is as much of an exaggeration as the assertion of some Catholic writers that the Apostolic Fathers were as conversant with the mystery of the Blessed Trinity as the great champions of orthodoxy during the fourth and fifth centuries. The truth seems to lie midway. We find here all the elements of the mystery — the unity of God, the divinity of the Son, and less clearly that of the Holy Ghost, together with the coex- istence of three divine terms in one Godhead — or the sub- stance of the doctrine qua factum mysterii; but to the com- bination of these elements, in so far as it involved any formal investigation or led to a theoretical exposition, it is not likely that much attention was given at the time. It must be remem- bered, however, that these matters are touched upon only in passing. Had the writers undertaken to give us a formal treatise on the points in question, the result would most likely bear quite a di^erent aspect. 4°. The Humanity of Christ and the Unity of Person in *" Ibid. " Eph. 9, I, 2. " I daa. 45. 2, 3- •* Antioch. ?, I. "Ibid. 46, 6. MEph. 9, i; Magn. 13, i. »Ibid. 58, 2. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 77 the Saviour. — ^That Christ was true man is presupposed by all these writers as a matter of universal belief. He comes from Abraham " according to the flesh," "* is the " Son of God made manifest in the flesh," "" is " our God Jesus Christ borne in the womb by Mary, of the seed of David and of the Holy Ghost." '" Furthermore, a few of them, like Ignatius and Polycarp, emphasize this point very strongly against the Docetse, who maintained that Christ's humanity was only a semblance of human nature. "Jesus Christ," says Ignatius, "was truly a descendant of the race of David according to the flesh, truly bom of a virgin, and truly baptized by John, that all justice might be fulfilled by Him ; for us truly nailed to the cross in His flesh under Pontius Pilate and Herod the Tetrarch." ■*' " He suffered truly, as He also raised Himself truly from the dead, and not, as some unbelievers pretend that He only seemed to suffer." '* And in the resurrection He again took up His body : " For I know that even after the resurrection He was in the flesh, and I believe that He is so now." '• Polycarp is not less outspoken. " For every one," he says, " who does not confess that Jesus Christ came in the flesh, is antichrist : and whoso does not confess the testimony of the Cross, is of the devil; and whoso wrests the sayings of the Lord to his own desires and says there is to be no resur- rection and no judgment, he is the first-bom of Satan.""" Christ, therefore, is true God and true man ; is He then one person in two natures? This seems to be assumed throughout. Like the Evangelists and the Apostles before them, all these writers know only one Christ, who is at the same time the Son of God and the Redeemer of the world. " If the Lord," asks Pseudo-Barnabas, "bore sufferings for our soul's sake, seeing that He is the Lord of the world, to whom God said in the beginning, ' Let us make man to our image and likeness,' how then did He suffer at the hands of men?" And he answers, it was for this reason "that it behooved Him to •* Oem. 32, 2. " Smyrn. 3. •' Barn. 12, la •" Smyrn. 3. i- »• Imat. Eph. 8, a *> Polyc 7, I. " Sniym. i, 3 ; 3. D,g,;,zeclbyG00gIC 78 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES appear in the flesh, so as to destroy death and show forth the resurrection from the dead." ** It was not a mere man who suffered and died, but "the Lord of the world," who had assumed a passible nature like our own. " The Lord Jesus Christ," says Clement, " according to the disposition of the divine will, gave His blood for us, His flesh for our flesh, His soul for our souls." ** And in this manner they all reason, without ever giving the slightest hint that they distinguished in Christ between the man and God. He is to them one individual, at the same time God and man. Hence, although they did not theorize on the point, the obvious inference is that they assumed such a union between the two elements in Christ as would make Him one person. This, moreover, appears almost to evidence from the letters of St. Ignatius, who treats the matter somewhat more in detail. " There is one physician," he says, " both corporal and spiritual, begotten and unbegotten, God existing in the flesh, true life in death, both of Mary and of God, first passible then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord."'* And again : " Expect Him who is above all time, the eternal, the invisible, for our sakes visible, the impalpable, the impassible, for our sakes passible, who has suffered in all manner of ways for our sakes."** What can this possibly imply except the unity of person and the distinction of natures in Christ? The author advances indeed no theory about the nature of the union, but he expresses himself in a manner that is justified only on the supposition that he considered it to be hypostatic. He knows only one Jesus Christ, who is at the same time God and man. A modem theologian could hardly place the matter in a clearer light. 5°. The Redemption. — The purpose of Christ's coming is regarded by nearly all of these writers as twofold: To bring us the knowledge of God and to deliver us from the death of sin. " This is the way, beloved, in which we find salvation," writes Clement, " Jesus Christ, the pontiff of our oblations, the advocate and helper of our infirmity. Through Him we DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 79 behold the heights of the heavens; . . . through Him the Lord willed that we should taste immortal knowledge." *' " Let us fix our eyes upon the blood of Christ, and know how precious it is in the sight of God His Father ; it was shed for our salvation and brought the grace of repentance to the whole world." ** " Jesus Christ," says Ignatius, " who is the thought of the Father, the truthful mouth by which the Father ex- presses Himself, has become for us the knowledge of God and our teacher." *^ " He bore all His sufferings for our sakes, that we might obtain salvation; and He truly suffered, as He also truly raised Himself from the dead."'* Even Hernias, who, as we have seen, probably went astray on the divinity of Christ, bears witness to the prevalence of this view in regard to Christ's coming into this sinful world. " God," he says, " planted a vineyard, that is, He created a people, and gave it to His Son ; and the Son placed angels over the people for their protection ; and He Himself washed away their sins, laboring much and sustaining many trials; for no vineyard can be cultivated without labor and sorrows. He therefore having washed away the sins of the people, showed them the ways of life, giving them a law which He received from His Father." «» It is especially deserving o( notice that these writers are perfectly familiar with the theory of vicarious satisfaction, which modem critics usually consider as a later development. When Clement states that " our Lord Jesus Christ, according to the disposition of the divine will, gave His blood for us, His flesh for our flesh, His soul for our souls," '"' he evidently goes on the supposition that Christ was put in our place, that " Him who knew no sin, for us God hath made sin, that we might be made the justice of God in Him," as St. Paul ex- pressed it in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians. It is in the same sense that Ignatius tells the Christians of Smyrna : " But all things He has suffered for our sakes, that we might obtain salvation."'* •» I aem. 3(^ I, a. ••SimiL 6, 2, 3. « Ibid. 7, 4. '• I Gem. 4ft 6. •* C£r. Eph. 3, 2 ; 17, 2 ; Rom, 8, 3. t» Smym. a. ••Smym. 2. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 8o THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES This is brought out with greater emphasis by Pseudo-Barna- bas in his reasoning against the Jews. He tells them that they have no cause to be scandalized at the sufferings and shameful death of the Saviour, since these are no sign of His weakness but rather a proof of the needs of our sinful nature. " If the Son of God, He who is the Lord and shall judge the living and the dead, suffered, it was because He wished to give us life by His stripes." " Be sure that the Son of God could not undergo sufferings save on our account; He gave His own body as a sacrifice for our sins." " The Lord willed to deliver His body that by the forgiveness of our sins we might be sanctified, which is effected by the asper- sion of His blood; for it is written: He was wounded for our iniquities and bruised for our sins, by His bruises we are healed." " If He suffered, it was for our souls, ... to de- stroy death and to bring about the resurrection of the dead, and to fulfill the promise made to our fathers that He would prepare unto Himself a new people." ^^ 6°. The Church of Christ. — In one way or another, all these writers assume that the fruits of the redemption are laid up for the individual in the Church, which was founded by Christ and locally established by the Apostles and their disciples. The two who especially enlarge on this point are Clement and Ignatius, although the others also bring oul the same idea. Clement's teaching on the Church is based on the principle of unity through authority. The Gospel of Christ, he says, has been preached in the whole world. His elect are every- where ; they are His people, a holy portion reserved to Him- self. They form His body, and the unity of that body they must ever preserve.'' "Let us mark," he tells the Corin- thians, " the soldiers that are enlisted under our rulers, how exactly, how readily, how submissively, they execute the orders given them. All are not eparchs, or rulers of thousands, or rulers of hundreds, or rulers of fifties, and so forth ; but each "I Clem. 5, 7; 49, a, 3; 3(^ 3. 3; S, 1 ' DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOUC FATHERS 8l man in his own rank executeth the orders given by the king and his chief officers." '* For the building up of this body, Christ sent His Apostles, even as He was sent by the Father. " Christ, therefore, was sent by God, and the Apostles were sent by Christ: so both were sent orderly, according to the will of God." ^' Hence the community of the faithful, governed by proper authority, has Christ for its founder; and therefore those who foment schism set at naught the divine ordinances, they " tear asunder the members of Christ." ™ The Apostles in their turn, after preaching the Gospel in country places and in cities, chose men of approved virtue and made them bishops and deacons, as had already been foreshadowed in the Old Testament, where it is said ; I will confirm' their bishops in justice and their deacons in faith." And this they did of set purpose, for they well knew that after their death contention would arise over the episcopal dignity. Therefore they ordained that after their going hence other virtuous and holy men should receive their ministry. And these, thus lawfully constituted, cannot, so long as they faithfully discharge the duties of their office, be removed with- out grave fault.^* From this it appears that in the matter of Church govern- ment three points were quite clear to the author's mind: First, that there existed in the Church an authority which the faithful were bound in conscience to obey; secondly, that this authority was derived through the Apostles from Christ Himself; thirdly, that the Apostles themselves made provision for its perpetuation. All this he assumes as well known, and therefore he considers it sufficient to call attention to it in passing. As regards the distribution of this authority, or the various grades of the hierarchy, the author's way of speaking is not clear. He usually designates those entrusted with ecclesi- astical functions as presbyters, but in one place he dis- "Ibid. 34, 7. "Ibid. 42, 4; 40, s. " Ibid. 42, I, a. *■ Ibid. 44, I, ^ 3, 4, 6; 4?, a " Ibid. 4, 6, 7. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 82 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES tinguishes them as bishops and deacons." He also men- tions a division into high priest, priests, and levites, each class having its own functions to perform.^" It is true, this bears direct reference only to the Old Law, but it seems to suppose a similar division of ecclesiastical functionaries in the New Dispensation. He likewise states that at certain definite times oblations must be made and the sacred functions performed, and with this the bishops and deacons are entrusted.*^ It seems that he uses the tenn " presbyters " as including both bishops and priests, thus fol- lowing the manner of speaking also found in St Paul. At all events, these ecclesiastical superiors are the guides of our soiJs; they must be obeyed and honored.** In this connection must also be mentioned the author's testi- mony to the Primacy of Rome in the matter of Church gov- ernment This is, indeed, only implied, but it is none the less forceful and clear. He puts himself obviously in the posi- tion of a judge, and as such holding the place of God. He is writing under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and looks for obedience from those to whom he directs his exhortation.®' He regrets that circumstances would not allow him to attend to this matter before, but now he will leave nothing undone to bring about peace; and if any there be who will not obey in those things which God conmiands through Him, they will be guilty of a grievous ofTense and run a great risk: still, whatever be the outcome of his intervention, he has done his duty and will be without sin before God." And thus, throughout the whole letter, he speaks as a su- perior to his subjects, though always in a fatherly way. There is no hesitancy, no weakness, no fear of unauthorized intru- sion anywhere. Nor does it make any difference whether we suppose that he was appealed to by the church of Corinth or not ; the very fact that he proceeds as one who has a right to command shows that he is conscious of his authority, and also that the Corinthians are supposed to recognize the legiti- »»Ibid. 42, 4. "Ibid. 6, 3, I ; 1, 3. •• Ibid. 40, 5. »• Ibid. 63. a. ■> Ibid. 40, 3 ; 44, 4. ** Ibid, i, j ; 5ft- 3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 83 macy of its exercise in adjusting their domestic difficulties. In this we can clearly discern the fundamental idea of the Primacy of Rome as understood at the present time. According to Ignatius Christ is the " door of the Father, by which Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and all the Prophets, as well as the Apostles and the Church, did enter." Hence he says : " Christianity did not believe in Judaism, but Judaism believes in Christianity, in which are gathered together all those who believe in God."" Christ "has set up through His resurrectton, in all ages, a standard for the saints and for His followers, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, in the wie body of His Church," " " Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is the thought of the Father, as also the bishops, all die world over, are in agreement with the mind of Jesus Christ" " Hence " where the bishop shall appear, there let the people also be; as where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church." "" The term " Catholic Church " appears here for the first time, although the doctrine contained in it is found in earlier writers as well. As here used it desig[nates the Church of Christ in her universality, as spread over the whole world, " per tractus terrae," and including the various local com- munities as integral members. In this sense the epithet seems to have been in common use at the rime, or at least a little later, as appears from the " Martyrium Polycarpi," where it occurs three times; But in its secondary meaning, denoting opposition to heretical sects, it was probably not used until the latter part of the second century. It may be noted that Ignarius, although occasionally referring to the "Catholic Church," is nevertheless almost exclusively occupied in his letters with the Church as established in particular communi- ties. Whatever he says about Church government, the need of union among the faithful, or the particulars of divine wor- ship, is primarily intended for local bodies of Christians. Under ordinary circumstances, and in the ordering of its daily life, each community is guided by its own ecclesiastical DigiLizedbyGoOglc 84 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES superiors, " the bishop presiding in the place of God, the presbyters holding the place of Uie Apostolic college, and the deacons having entrusted to them the ministry of Jesus Christ." *• As long as the faithful are subject to this divinely constituted authority, they do all things according to the mind of God. The Church thus conceived, as universal in extension yet localized in particular communities, is the house of the Heav- enly Father, His family.*" Therein are stored up the graces of redemption, which are shared in by those who continue in communion with the bishop.*^ " For without the bish<^ it is not lawful to baptize, nor to celebrate the agape; but what- ever he approves of, that is pleasing to God," *^ Owing, no doubt, partly to the heresies and schisms that were then threat- ening, and partly also to the bishop's position as the center of unity and source of orthodoxy to each particular com- munity, St. Ignatius never tires of admonishing the faithful to be loyal in their adhesion to the bishop. It must, however, be noted that, in all this repeated insistence upon proper sub- jection, he nowhere says a word in defense of the institution of hierarchical powers and offices. That the hierarchy, in its various grades as he knows them, bishop, priests, and deacons, has a legitimate existence, and is therefore of Apos- tolic origin, he takes for granted as acknowledged by all, not only in Asia Minor, but " per tractus terrae," all the world over,'^ In this he but reproduces the teaching of St. Clement. And like that writer, he also bears witness to the Primacy of Rome. This appears in his letter to the Romans. " I do not command," he tells them, " as did Peter and Paul." •* " You have never envied any one, you have taught others. And I too wish those things to be firm which you teach and command." *^ " Be mindful in your prayers of the church of Syria, which has in my stead God for its pastor. Jesus Christ alone and your charity govern it now in place of its MMagn. 6, i. ^Eph. 3, 2. ••Eph. 6, r. ••Rom. 4, 3, •> Smyrn. 8, i. » Ibid. 3, i. ** Sn^Tii. 8, 3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 85 bishop." *• Hence in the inscription of his letter, the author addresses the Church which is " in the place of the country of the Romans " as presiding over the brotherhood of charity, which brotherhood is made up of the faithful dispersed through the various local churches all over the world.'^ Non-Catholic scholars commonly take a different view of this matter, but, as Bardenhewer remarks, this want of agreement on their part is the outcome not of historical criticism as such, but of his- torical criticism perverted by religious bias. The fact that Ignatius admitted the Primacy of the Roman Church cannot well be doubted, but whether he held it to be of divine origin is not stated. Hennas also dilates somewhat on the position of the Church in the divine economy of salvation, but owing to his allegoriz- ing tendencies he is less satisfactory. He represents the faith- ful, stamped in baptism with the seal of spiritual regeneration, as incorporated in the Mystic Tower, which is a figure of the Church of Christ. The Church thus conceived is the new Israel, built upon the foundation of the Prophets and the Apos- tles, but of which the Son of God is Himself the comer- stone." The Tower is still in building, and God Himself supervises the work. Only perfect stones are used, but in course of time many lose thetr original perfection. These are then removed from their position and handed over to the Angel of Penance, who cleanses and reshapes them, and thus makes them fit to be once more inserted into the walls of the Tower.»» All this is allegorical, but through the allegory one can get a glimpse of the reality that stood before the author's mind. The Tower in its completion and final perfection is, of course, a figure of the Church Triumphant in heaven, but so long as it is in building it also designates the Church Militant on earth. It is a Church in which penance is still of avail, and where the deformity of vice dwells side by side with the beauty of virtue. It is the same Church as that which the author ••Ibid, ft I. kirch. Lit. I, 123-124. •* Cfr. Batiffol, PrhniHve Cathol- ■• SimiL 9, S, I, 2. kisni, 140-143; Bardenhewer, Alt- •• SimiL 9, 6-7. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 86 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES elsewhere depicts under the figure of a willow tree, some of whose branches have been cut off and are apparently lifeless; yet, when they are planted in the earth and well watered, they grow again.'"" In its most comprehensive sense, therefore, the Church includes all believers, whether they are still strug- gling here on earth or have already attained the eternal joys of heaven. Hence the author gives, in outline at least, also the fundamental elements of the Communion of Saints. In one sense the Church dates from the beginning of the world, and the world was, in fact, created for the Church ; '"^ but in another sense she has her origin also in the redemption of mankind by the Son of God. " As many as hear His mes- sage, and believe, are called in His name. When they have received the baptismal seal, they are all of one heart and mind, having but one faith and one charity." ^"^ Hence, too, the Tower, which represents the Church, is built " upon the waters." *"• When Hermas asks the reason of this, he is told: " Because your life is saved and shall be saved by water." Without baptism no one can become a member of the Church. TTiis is so true that " the Apostles and the teachers, who preached the name of the Son of God, after they had fallen asleep in the power and faith of the Son of God, preached also to those who had fallen asleep before them, and themselves gave unto them the seal of preaching. Therefore they went down with them into the water and came up again. But these went down alive and came up alive ; whereas the others that had fallen asleep went down dead and came up alive." ^'** Hence the author holds that all the just, who had died before the advent of Chris- tianity, had to be baptized after their death. Thus the Church is indeed a spiritual creation, embracing all times and comprising all the saints of God, yet in her concrete existence she is constituted in local and visible com- munities, into which the members are admitted by a sacra- »•• Simil. 8, 2, ?. *** Vis. 3, 2. "" Vis. 2, 4, I ; 1, 1, 6, '** SimiL 9, 16. "' Simil. 9, 17, 4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 87 mental rite. In these communities are presiding officers and presbyters to whom the author is directed to read his book, and who sit down first in the assembly of the faithful.^"* Mention is also made of apostles, bishops, teachers, and dea- cons, some of whom are dead, whilst others are still living."' Then there is a certain Clement, who appears to be at the head of them all and to have authority over the whole Church. To him the author must give a copy of his book, that he may send it to other cities.'" This obviously refers to Clement of Rome, the third successor of Sl Peter, whose primatial position thus appears to have been accepted by the faithful as an imdisputed fact The other writers belonging to this group speak of the Church only in passing. Thus the author of the Didache directs the faithful to pray that the Lord may be mindful of His Church, and gather her from the four winds into the kingdom He has prepared for her.'"" In connection with the Eucharist he speaks of bishops and deacons, whose oSke it is to celebrate the divine mysteries. " Constitute, therefore, for yourselves bishops and deacons, who are worthy of the Lord ; men of gentle character and not greedy of money ; men who speak the truth and are of approved virtue : for they also exercise in your behalf the ministry of the prophets and teachers." "» Besides bishops and deacons, the autlior mentions three other classes who exercise various functions of the ministry. They are: (a) Apostles, who are engaged in missionary woii, going from community to community, or preaching the Gos- pel to the heathens, (b) Prophets, who teach and speak in the Spirit. As they are the recipients of special charisms, they hold the most honorable place among Christian min- isters. Every sin can be forgiven, except that of speaking against a true prophet, (c) Teachers, who instruct the faith- ful, but do not speak in the Spirit. Their knowledge is ac- quired by study, and their lessons must be prqnred. All »•• Vis. a, 4, 3; 3, 18. »«Di*»d)eiOk5. '••Vis. 4,5. t- ^wibiA 15, I. - »wvis. a; 4. 3- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 88 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES three classes are subject to certain trials, and rules are given to distinguish the true from the false.^'" Fseudo-Bamabas briefly notes that the Saviour gathered together a new nation, a holy people, the heir of those great promises which the Jews had falsely appropriated to them- selves. This new nation is the Church of Christ, " the good land, the land of Jacob, the vessel of His Spirit," and as such tiie depository of spiritual gifts, the organ of the Spirit's manifestation to the world. The Church is holy, for it is the Church of saints; it is also one, so that all schism is to be condemned.*^* However, with regard to the constitution of the Church and ecclesiastical government, the author says nothing definite. Polycarp implies that the hierarchy consists of three de- grees, the bishop, priests, and deacons. He calls particular attention to the virtues required in deacons and priests, and warns them especially against avarice.*** They have author- ity over the faithful, who must obey them as they would obey God Himself.*^' Priests, however, should be lenient in their treatment of delinquents, for we are all sinners before God."* The " Martyrium Polycarpi " brings out very prominently that the Church is " Catholic." The term occurs three times in the body of the letter and once in the inscription. Dr. Funk contends that it ts here used not merely in its primary sense, denoting universality, but also in its secondary meaning, as implying distinction from the conventicles of heretics. Others, however, do not accept this view, but maintain that in this latter sense the term is met with for the first time in the Mura- torian fragment, which originated most likely tovtrards the end of the second century. The Secunda dementis refers several times to " presbyters," whose duty it is to instruct the people, and disobedience to whom is sinful before God. " Let us not think to give heed and believe now only, while we are admonished by the pres- "•Ibid. n, 1-12; 13, a-7. ""Ibid, s, 3- ""Barn. 6; 7; 11; 19. ""IKd. 6, i. "•Polycfi, i;s,3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 89 byters; but likewise, when we have departed home, let us remember the commandments of the Lord." Unless we do this, we shall bewail it on the day of judgment, because " we obeyed not the presbyters, when they told us of our salva- tioa""' Besides these incidental referwices, the airthor gives the following rather puz2Ung description of the Church. He as- sumes that the Church is necessary for salvation, because she is the body of Christ. And she is the body of Christ, " be- cause Scripture says, God made man male and female. The male is Christ, and the female is the Church, And the books of the Prophets and the Apostles plainly declare that the Church is not of to-day, but hath been from the beginning: for she was spiritual, as our Jesus also was spiritual, but she was manifested in these latter days that she might save us. Now the Church, which is spiritual, was manifested in the flesh of Christ, thereby showing us that, if any of us guard her in the flesh and defile her not, he shall receive her again in the Holy Spirit : for this flesh is the antitype of the spirit No man, therefore, when he hath defiled the anti- type, shall receive the reality. Listen then, brethren : Guard ye the flesh, that you may partake of the spirit. But if we say that our flesh is the Church and the spirit of Christ, then he that soiled the flesh hath soiled the Church, and such a one, therefore, shall not partake of the spirit, which is Christ." "« This is at best not very illuminating. That the Church is the body of Christ, of course in a mystical sense, is per- fectly orthodox, and is evidently derived from the teaching of St. Paul; but the idea of her spiritual pre-existence, as here portrayed, seems altogether foreign to the Christian con- cept of the Church, although something like it appears also in Hernias. BatiflFol suggests that it was derived from Jewish ^culations about the heavenly Jerusalem." '" 7°. Baptism. — Entrance into the Church is obtained through baptism, because the Church is " built upon the waters." On "•II Oem. 17. "»0. c i8a. 183. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 90 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES this all these writers are agreed, in as much as they assume every Christian to have received baptismal regeneration. Hence the author of the Didache says very positively ; " Let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, except he has been baptized in the name of the Lord ; for it was in reference to this that the Lord said : ' Do not give holy things to dogs.' " '** The external rite is thus described by the same author; "After you have said all these things (that is, after you have properly instructed the catechumens), baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost, in flowing water. But if you have no flowing water, baptize in any other water ; if you cannot baptize in cold water, bap- tize in warm. But if you have neither (sufficient for immer- sion), pour water three times on the head in tlie name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost." "" The minister and the candidate, and, if possible, some others also, ought to fast one or two days before baptism is conferred.*^ The effects of baptism are thus neatly described by Pseudo- Barnabas : " We descend into the water full of sins and stains, and we come out of it bearing fruit, having in our hearts the fear, and in our minds the hope in Jesus." ^*' Thus baptism is a true renovation and the beginning of a new life, in which the fruits of the redemption are applied to the indi- vidual soul. Hence he says in another place : " When, there- fore. He renovated us through the remission of sins, He brought it about that we should have another form, to wit, a soul like that of children, seeing that He reformed us." "* We become in a manner the living temple of God ; for " hav- ing received the remission of sins, and filled with hope in the name of the Lord, we have become new men, again created in our entirety : for this reason God truly dwells in us, in our own dwelling. How? 'His word of faith. His calling. His promise, the wisdom of commands, the precepts of doctrine. He himself prophesying and dwelling in us, opening the door, to wit, the mouth, to us who are given up to death, all this ii« Didache 9, 5. »*» Bam. 11, 11. »»• Ibid. 7, I, 2, 3- "» Ibid. 6, 11 "• Ibid. 7, 4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 91 inspires us with penance and introduces us into the incorrup- tible temple." *" Hernias speaks almost in the same terms : " Before man bore the name of son of God," he says, " he was dead ; but when he received the seal, he put off mortality and resumed Hfe. The water therefore is a seal; they descend into the water in the state of death and come up alive." "* This new life is marked by union in faith and charity and by moral purity : " Having then received the seal, they had one mind, one faith, and one charity, and they bore within them the spirits of virgins together with the name." ^^ That baptism is a seal which marks the Christian as belong- ing in a special manner to God, and which carries with it the obligation of a holy life, is also brought out by the author of the Secunda Qementis, who exhorts the faithful to preserve immaculate the "sphragis" or seal, for this will entitle them to everlasting life, while its violation through sin leads to eternal loss.^" " If we keep not our baptism pure and unde- filed," he says in another place, " what confidence can we have of entering into the kingdom of God ? " ^" Precisely what these writers understood by the " seal " is not clear, but in view of later developments it may be assumed that they referred to the sacramental character. 8°. The Holy Eucharist. — The author of the Didache speaks of the Eucharist in two different places. In chapters 9 and ID he gives the prayers to be said before and after receiving, at least according to the more common interpretation of the passage. Here the consecrated elements are called " spiritu^ food and drink," which those only are allowed to receive who "have been baptized in the name of the Lord." In chapter 14 he says : " But on the Lord's Day coming together break bread and give thanks, after you have confessed your sins, so that your sacrifice may be pure. And let no one who has a controversy with his friend associate with you, until they have been reconciled, lest your sacrifice should be made unclean. >*• Ibid. 16, 8, 0. 'M SimiL 9, il^ 3, 4. **■ SiimL A 17, 4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 92 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES For this was said by the Lord: In every place and at all times let there be offered to me a clean sacrifice, because I am a great king, saith the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the Gentiles." Hence the author evidently regards the Eucharistic rite as the Christian sacrifice, but he makes no explicit mention of the Real Presence. Clement also refers to the Eucharist as a sacrifice, when he tells the Corinthians that they must do all things which the Lord has enjoined to be performed at stated times. " For He commanded that oblations should be made and that the sacred functions should be performed, not carelessly and without due order, but at stated times and hours." ^** And then he in- stances how God had made similar regulations for the priests of the Old Law.'» All this, however, is more fully treated by Ignatius, who comes back to it again and again in his exhortations to union with the bishop. Thus, writing to the Ephesians on the neces- sity of perfect union, he reminds them that they " are break- ing one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immor- tality, the antidote against death, and causes us to live for- ever in Christ Jesus." "" He uses the term " Eucharist " not only to designate the ritual action, but also to signify the consecrated elements themselves. Speaking of the Docetse, he says that " they abstain from the Eucharist and prayer, because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of the Saviour, which has suffered for our sins and which the Father has raised up from the dead in His kindness." "^ In this, as is quite evident, the Real Presence is not only assumed or implied, but explicitly stated. The same is true of several other texts, as, for instance, when he writes to the Romans: " I take no delight in the food of corruption, nor in the pleas- ures of this life: I desire the Bread of God which is the flesh of Jesus Christ, who is of the seed of David." "' Hence when in other places he speaks of the Eucharist as a symbol and bond of union, he cannot possibly intend, as some modem »*si Qem. 4D, i, »»> Smyrn. 7, I. t*» Ibid. 40, s. »" Rom. 7, 3. ^oB^. ao. 2. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 93 critics maintain, that the Saviour's presence in the consecrated elements is only symbolic. As Ignatius understands it, the body and Wood of Jesus are really present, and because of their real presence the Eucharist is the symbol and bond of unicaL He also makes reference to the Christian sacrifice, when he writes that " there is but one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ, and one chalice in the unity of his Uood, one place of sacrifice, as also there is one bishop with the presbyterium and the deacons." "' 9°. Penance. — Although these writers consider baptism as the beginning of a new life, which ought to be free from sin, nevertheless they all refer to penance as a matter of necessity for the ordinary Christian. They also give to this penance a kind of official character, which connects it in some way with the ministration of the Church. Thus the author of the Didache tells his readers in two different places that they must confess their sins in the Church,^" and this direction is repeated by Pseudo-Barnabas.^" When Clement exhorts the disturbers of the peace at Corinth to do penance, he bids them to submit themselves to the presbyters.*" Ignatius tells the Christians at Philadelphia that " God remits the sins of all penitents, if they repent, acknowledging the unity of God and following the counsel of the bishop." ^^^ Polycarp admon- ishes the priests at Philippt to be lenient in their treatment of delinquents,"* and the author of the Secunda Clementis ex- horts his hearers to do penance for the sins which they have committed in the flesh, so that they may be saved by the Lord whilst they have time to repent. " For after we have departed this life, we can no longer confess and do penance." "' The matter is more fully treated by Hermas, who made it the burden of his entire book. He has heard it said by some that the only efficacious penance is the one connectwl with baptism, when a full remission of former sins is granted ; and he has also heard it said by others that there is no need of "« Philad. 4. »' Philad 8, i. 1** Didache 4, 14 ; 14, i. "» Polyc. 6, i. »»» Bam. 19. 12. »'• II Ueiii. 8, a, 3. »• I Qem. S7, 1. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 94 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES penance: but neither of these views is acceptable."* For penance is certainly necessary, and it is also efficacious after . baptism."* However, efficacious penance is possible only for sins committed up to the time of his writing; those who avail themselves of it are assured of forgiveness, but if after that they sin again they run a great risk, they shall hardly be saved.'*' Hence for Christians there is only one penance, granted them by the merciful God who knows the weakness of human nature. This penance, however, is conceded to all ; not even the wicked race of apostates, whose plight appears so desperate, is excluded from it: they, too, may thereby be restored to their former place.'*' From this reasoning of the author some have concluded that the penance here mentioned was by way of a special c•• Mandat. 4, 4, i, 3. ••* Didacbe 16, 7. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TEACHING OF THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS 97 Bamabas holds there will be a Millennium before the final consummation of thii^.'^' Many other points o£ doctrinal value are brought out by these writers, which the want of space forbids us to consider in this connection. Thus, Hennas, for instance, has much to say about the angels as ministering spirits; the " Martyriiun Polycarpi " points out most clearly the difference between di- vine worship and the veneration of martyrs, and all of them emphasize the necessity of faith and good works for the attain- ment of salvation. As already pointed out, these writings are almost entirely of a practical character, so that points of dogmatic import are usually brought in to drive home a lesson in right living; yet in spite of this, we find here an outline of Catholic teaching that is almost complete in its fundamental doctrines. There is room indeed for develop- ment, but there is no need of change in order to bring this incidental teaching of the sub-Apostolic past in connection with the fuller exposition of the actual present. This, however, will appear more clearly in the following chapters. And here it must be noted how conservative these writers themselves are, how chary of innovation. They have received a message from their predecessors in the faith, and that mes- sage they are careful to hand down unaltered, " Do not devi- ate from the commandments of the Lord," says the author of the Didache, " but guard what thou hast received, neither adding thereto nor taking aught away from it" ^'* " Those who foment schisms," writes Clement, " tear asunder the mem- bers of Christ" ^'"' " If any one speaks to you without Christ," says Ignatius, "close your ears, do not listen to him." '" And again : " Do not be deceived, brethren ; if any one follows him that causes a schism, he shall not obtain the inheritance of the heavenly kingdom." "' " If any one wrests the sayings of the Lord to his own desires," adds Polycarp, " he is the first-bom of Satan." ^"^ No matter how familiar these writers might be with Greek thought and Greek philosophy, ' Bam. 4, 13. "•Trail. 9, I. ' Didache 4. I3- '" Philad. 3. 3- 'iaeiii.4,6,7. "• Polyc 7, I. D,j.,.db,Googlc 98 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES they experienced no temptation of thereby widening the deposit of faith entrusted to their keeping. Even of legitimate devel- opment there is hardly a trace in their writings, as a reference . to the chapter on New Testament teaching will readily show. Their one and only care, the thought ever uppermost in their minds, was to guard and transmit the faitli received from the Apostles. If any one dared touch that, and thus preach another gospel than tfie one which had been preached, he was forthwith put down as " the first-bom of Satan," with whom Christians could hold no communion. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER VI HERETICAL TENDENQES AND PAGAN OPPOSITION TO CHRISTIANITY DURING THE SECOND CENTURY i It was towards the middle of the second century that doc- trinal development began to manifest itself along the various lines of Christian thought. Up to that time, as was seen in the preceding chapter, little had been done by the teaching body of the Church besides stating the different revealed truths as they had been handed down by the Apostles. No philosophical inquiry had been made as regarded their full contents; nor had the concrete conditions of Christian life called for such inquiry. The large body of Christians, though not without its representative men, distinguished alike for literary attainments and social position, was on the whole made up of simple folk, who were well satisfied to know that Jesus Qirist was the Son of God, that He had come to save a sinful world from death, that He wished His followers to cling together as a chosen nation, that He was still in their midst, governing them through His authoritative representa- tives and nourishing them with His fiesh and blood, and held out to all the promise of eternal life, if they would but strive to follow in His footsteps. But how all this was to be ex- plained, what was the ultimate rational setting of these revealed verities, and how these verities themselves might be put into exact theolc^cal concepts and set forth in apt defini- tions, had, with perhaps a few exceptions, not even begun to dawn upon the minds of the most progressive teachers. The fact of revelation was known, and the contents of the deposi- tor. Duchesne, The Earl^ His- genroether-KJrsch, Handbuch der tory of the Church, I, 113-143; allgemeinen KirdienKeschichte, 4th Bardenhewer, Allkirch. Litt. I, 315- Ed. I, 144-183. This last named ¥7; *Bethune- Baker, Op. cit. 76-93; author gives a singTilarly clear and ixcront, H. D. I, 153-190; Her- full exposition of Gnostidsm. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 100 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES htm fidei were readily accepted, but the rational side of these contents was still an unexplored world. This could, however, not go on indefinitely. Little by little men trained in the various schools of Greek thought, who were eagerly in search of the true philosophy of life, came in con- tact with this new teaching, and, as a necessary consequence, subjected it to critical investigation along rational lines of inquiry. Some of them surrendered themselves to it with a whole-souled singleness of purpose ; others accepted it with many reservations; whilst others, again, studied it only for the sake of holding up to ridicule its supposed inconsistencies. AH three classes of inquirers, each in its own way, were instru- mental in initiating and promoting doctrinal development. There were also, indeed, other contributory causes at work: such as popular calumny on the one hand, and the silent teaching of the Holy Spirit in the hearts of the faithful on the other; but they were, in this respect, more or less subsidiary to the first named, that is, to the efforts of intellectual inquirers into the truths of Christianity. Of these three classes, thus interested in Christian teaching, the first was made up of orthodox writers, who are commonly called Apologists, The second consisted of men strongly marked by heterodox tendencies, and sometimes openly hereti- cal in their views. The third embraced numerous contem- porary pagan authors, and such purveyers of popular calum- nies as provoked the Christian Apologists to an active defense of their faith. For clearness' sake and for a better under- standing of the general drift of orthodox teaching as con- tained in the apologetical writings of the time, we shall begin our present inquiry with a brief exposition of the principal Gnostic systems of philosophical speculation along the lines of Christian thought. After this a word may be said about Millennarianism, which found favor both with heretics and some orthodox writers. And finally a summary account must be given of pagan opposition to the faith, as tiiat also had a determining influence on the doctrinal exposition of the Apologists. DigiLizedbyGoOglc GNOSTIC HERESIES loi A — Gnosticism: Various Systems: Influence on Christian Thought Gnosticism may be said to rest upon a triple foundation — Oriental mysticism, Greek philosophy, and the Gospel of Jesus. It is, indeed, not always possible to determine from which of these three sources any particular doctrine of the Gnostics is derived, or to affirm that there are no other ele- ments contained in it, nevertheless it is here that we find the general basis on which the various systems are built up. Thus from the Orient comes the idea and conviction that matter is essentially evil, and that therefore the Father-God, the Su- preme Good, cannot have created the world. Hence the inven- tion of a demiurge, who is usually identified with the Creator- God of the Old Testament. Hence, too, the Docetic doctrine that the Redeemer, whose divinity is defended by the Gnostics, did not come in the flesh, but merely assumed the appearance of our humanity. Then from Greek philosophy were taken not only the dialectic weapons of defense and attack, but fre- quently also the intellectual moulds in which current Oriental ideas were cast; and perhaps too, at least in its general con- cept, the exaggerated view of the abstract nature of God- Finally, the Gospel of Jesus supplied the supernatural material upon which the other elements of Gnosticism were brought to bear, for the purpose of shaping it into a consistent philoso- phy of life. In regard to this last point, however, it must be noted that the Gospel of Jesus, as understood and accepted by the Gnos- tics, is not identical with our canonical Gospels, although they too were made use of ; but under this title were gathered cer- tain special traditions, written or oral, which purported to contain secret conversations of the Saviour with some of His Apostles and of His first followers. In these conversations, which occurred after the resurrection, Jesus communicated to a chosen few the most profound mysteries of Gnosticism. Thus originated the gospels of Thomas, of Philip, of Judas, the Greater and Lesser Questions of Mary, and the Gospel of Perfection. It was on account of this claim to secret and DigiLizedbyGoOglc 102 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES more perfect knowledge, or special gnosis, that the followers of these systems, and more particularly the intellectual aristoc- racy among them, were labelled Gnostics by those who refused to admit their pretensions. The first beginnings of Gnosticism are usually traced back to Simon Magus, or Simon of Gitta in Samaria. According to St. Justin, who was a native of those parts, almost all Samaria honored Simon as a god, raised high above all other powers.' His doctrine, as summed up by St. Irena;us, was thoroughly Gnostic, but It is probable that some later develop- ments found their way into this summary.* From Samaria Simon's teaching passed to Antioch Jn Syria, where it was propagated by Menander and Satuminus about the time of Trajan. What particular views of their own they introduced cannot now be determined. Jesus, they held, had only an apparent body, and His mission was to defeat the God of the Jews. It was probably against them that Ignatius of Antloch defended the reality of Christ's human nature. A little later. Gnosticism found its way into Egypt, where it reached a high degree of development through the labors of two Alexandrians, Basilides and Valentlnus, the best repre- sentatives of Gnostic philosophy. Their efforts at proselytiz- ing, however, do not appear to have met with any permanent success. The same was the experience of Carpocrates, a Pla- tonic philosopher of Alexandria, who early in the second cen- tury founded a sect of his own. It was about this time that Cerdon, a Syrian by birth, endeavored to make propaganda for Gnosticism in Rome. His efforts, as far as his own system was concerned, proved futile, but he seems to have prepared the way for Marcion, who made a sort of common sense synopsis of Gnostic teach- ing. This Marcion was the son of a bishop in Asia Minor, and he himself professed to be a follower of St. Paul. About 140 he came to Rome, and shortly after he began to spread his heterodox views. These were Irased not upon secret sources •Cfr. I ApoL36;56;Dial. laa »Adv. Haer. I, 29-31; cfr. Ibid. DigiLizedbyGoOglc GNOSTIC HERESIES 103 of revelation and higher gnosis, but rather upon anti-Jewish and dualistic tendencies. According to him, there was no agreement possible between the revelation of Jesus and the teaching of the Old Testament ; nor between the God of crea- tion and the God of redemption. But how the relation of these two orders of things to one another was to be explained, he did not stop to inquire. His was a practical rather than a speculative mind. Both Cerdon and Marcion were admitted to penance, but they did not persevere.* Owing partly to the severity of its ethical code, and partly to the practical methods of its founder, Marcionism spread rapidly and made many converts. It had its martyrs, too, and resisted with uncommon energy the missionary efforts of Catholics as well as the violence of persecutors. Soon, how- ever, it split up into many sects, headed by such men as Basiliscus, Hermogenes, and Apelles. Of these, Apelles be- came the most famous. He differed from Marcion chiefly in admitting only one First Principle, ascribing creation not to a second god but to an angel. Some of these sects remained in existence till the seventh century. It would obviously be impossible, in a compendious work like the present, to trace up the divergent teaching of these different systems, but what was more or less common to them all may be placed under the following heads. With the excep- tion of one or two points, this summary is given by the Abbe Duchesne in his " Early History of the Church." ' 1°. Matter is essentially evil, hence God can have no con- nection with the world except through intermediaries ema- nating from Himself. 2°. The Creator and lawgiver of the Old Testament 13 not the true God. He is infinitely below the Father-God, the Supreme First Cause of all being. 3°. Neither did He know the true God, nor did the world, until the appearance of Jesus Christ, who was sent as ambas- sador from the Father-God. 4°. Between the Supreme First Cause and creation is inter- * Op, c 1, 137, 138. DigiLizedbyGoOgle 104 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES posed a complicated series of beings, which somehow con- stitutes an ideal world. But at some point or other in this series there occurred a catastrophe, utterly destroying its har- mony. It was from this primal disorder that the visible world, including its Creator, originated. 5". In humanity there are some elements capable of redemp- tion, having in one way or another come from the celestial world above the demiurge. Jesus Christ came to eifect their deliverance. 6°. As matter is essentially evil, the Incarnation cannot imply a real union between the Saviour's divinity and human nature. Hence the Gospel story is explained by having re- course to a purely moral union, or more frequently by reducing Christ's human nature to a mere semblance of humanity. 7°. Neither the suffering and death, nor the resurrection of Christ, were real. Nor does the future of the predestined include the resurrection of the body. Matter is simply not capable of salvation. &". The divine element which has strayed into humanity, that is, the predestined soul, has no solidarity with the flesh. There is a necessary opposition between the two. Hence some teach that the flesh must be annihilated by asceticism, whilst others maintain that the soul cannot be held responsible for the weaknesses of the flesh, and therefore may allow full sway to the lower appetites. Most writers on the subject are agreed that Gnosticism was for the time being a real danger to orthodox Christianity, especially as not a few of its defenders were men of singular ability; but they also point out that its actual influence was on the whole beneficial rather than injurious, although only in an indirect way. Once recognized as heretical, its leading tenets aroused strong opposition, and thus discredit was thrown on all leanings to dualism, on the negation of free will, and on the depreciation of Old Testament teaching. Then, too, by its constant appeal to Apostolic writings and traditions, it hastened the authoritative determination of the canon of Holy Scripture and ensured the safeguarding of such traditions as had really been handed down from Apos- DigiLizedbyGoOglc MILLENNARIAN SPECULATIONS 105 tolic times. Furthermore, it stimulated intellectual activity in orthodox circles, and forced Christian teachers to give an expositicm of revealed truths which had till then usually been expressed in Scriptural language Hence, although it was an evil tree, indirectly it brought forth good fruit.' B — ■ MlLLENNARIANISM ' Taking the term in its general sense, Millennarianism stands for a variety of views adopted by some early Christians in respect of an era of peace and happiness, which they expected would be inaugurated by Christ sometime before the last judgmoit. They looked forward to the Saviour's second coming, when He would establish on earth a kingdom of perfect Justice, over which He together with His saints would reign for a thousand years. Not all, indeed, assigned the exact time limit of a millennium to this period of earthly blessedness, but that duration seems to have been rather com- monly accepted, and hence the general term by which these different views were designated. Millennarianism is generally looked upon as a legacy from Judaism, although some writers on the subject trace it back to Parseeism, the religion of the ancient Persians. At any rate, certain obscure passages in both the Old and New Testa- ment were usually appealed to as affording a Scriptural basis. Thus the great fertility of the earth during the Messianic reign as described by the prophet Joel,^ the peace and glory of the children of God as pictured by Isaias," the new life of those slain for a testimony to Jesus, and especially their nile with Him for a thousand years, as represented by St. John in the Apocalypse ^^ — all these and similar predictions, inter- preted in a literal sense, were held to contain God's own promise of a millennium of earthly happiness. The different views, collectively designated as Millennari- • Cfr, ♦ Bethune-Baker, Op. cit. 91. ApostolJci, 2, 376; Tixeront, H. D. 92. I, 199 sqq. * Atxberger, Geschichte der ehnst- • Joel, 3, 'if-2t. lichen Eschatologie innerhslb der * Is. 11, 6-17; 6^ 18-33. vornicaenUchca Zeit; Funk, Patres "> Apoc aa, t-7; at. DigiLizedbyGoOglc I06 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES anism, may be divided into two classes. The first of these represents a gross and extreme form of MiUennarian expecta- tions, according to which the just, after their resurrection, were to live here on earth a Ufe of coarse sensual pleasure, " without law and without shame," This view was, of course, plainly heretical, being in evident opposition to the teaching of Christ and the law of God. According to Eusebius,'* it formed one of the tenets of the heresiarch Cerinthus. It seems to have also been advocated by the Ebionltes, the Mar- cionites, and some Apollinarians. In the first half of the third century it was openly defended by Nepos, an Egyptian bishop ; also by a certain Coracion, who is said to have drawn " whole dioceses over to his side." " This gross form of Millennarianism was strongly attacked by Caius, a Roman presbyter, who wrote during the latter part of the second cen- tury. Three quarters of a century later, it found a valiant opponent in Dionysius of Alexandria, whose efforts were so successful that he put an end to MiUennarian teachii^ in the East." The second class of views is commonly designated as Moderate Millennarianism. This, again, is divided into two kinds. Some represented the happiness of the just, whilst reigning with Christ on earth, as largely made up of material enjoyment; although they carefully eliminated everything of an immoral nature. Of this form of teaching we have a sample in the writings of Papias, who during the early part of the second century was bishop of Hierapolis. In a frag- ment of his book, entitled " Explanatio Sermonum Domini," he says : " The day will come when vines shall spring up that have each ten thoiKand branches, and each branch ten thou- sand offshoots, and each offshoot ten thousand smaller off- shoots, and each smaller offshoot shall bear ten thousand clusters, and each cluster ten thousand grapes, and each grape shall yield twenty-five measures of wine. And when one of the saints shall reach out his hand for a cluster, another cluster will cry out; ' I am the better one: take me, and through me " Hist Ecel. 3, 28. "Ibid. 3, 28, I, 2; 8, 24, 25; 6, DigiLizedbyGoOglc PAGAN OPPOSITION 107 bless the Lord.' " '* Lactantius, who wrote towards the end of the third century, points to a similar condition of things during the expected Millennium. Other writers, however, took a more spiritual view of the thousand years of earthly happiness. Tertullian, when al- ready a Montanist, described the Millennium as the heavenly Jerusalem that was to come down upon earth. Therein, he says, is prepared for the just an equivalent of spiritual joys and blessings for all they suffered and sacrificed in the cause of Christ.^" St. Irenseus also emphasized this spiritual aspect. "The just," he writes, "shall reign upon earth, growing in perfection because of the vision of the Lord, and through Him they shall become accustomed to beholding the glory of the Father; they shall also hold converse and live in closest union with the holy angels." ^' This form of Millennarianism is more or less clearly taught in the writings of Pseudo-Barnabas, Justin Martyr, Methodius of Olympus, Commodianus, Victorinus of Pettau, and Quintus Julius Hilarion. Augustine also seems to have favored it at first, but later in life he definitely rejected every form of Mil- lennarian teaching.^' It must be noted that besides the above mentioned writers, none others are found in Patristic times of whom it can be affirmed with any degree of certainty that they lent their sup- port to these fanciful speculations. Hence Millennarianism, even in its most moderate form, was in no proper sense of the term a part of Christian belief. Not only were its sup- porters few in number, but, with the exception of St. Justin, St. Irenaeus, and St. Methodius, all of them were either men of mediocre ability or else infected with heresy. C — Pagan Opposition Soon after the middle of the first century, when Christianity began to make rapid progress and some of its doctrines became imperfectly known to the pagans, a storm of opposition was 1* Funk, PP. Apost II, 376 aqq. *• Adv. Marc 3, 24, "Adv. Hacr. 5,35. 1; 5.32, 1. DigiLizedbyGoOglc io8 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES raised that made the position of the faithful extremely pre- carious. This opposition arose in the first instance from the populace, which charged the Christians with all manner of crimes — atheism, impiety, infanticide, cannibalism, and the like.'* The Christians on their part, when the opportuni^ offered, answered these calumnies by emphatic denials and appeals to facts ; but this availed little, since it was practically impossible to make the sublime nature of Christian worship intelligible to a people steeped in moral corruption.^^ Then, in the early part of the second century, these popular outbursts began to be followed up by systematic attacks on the part of pagan philosophers, who saw their prestige inter- fered with by the efforts of Christian teachers. These men, for the most part untrained in the subtleties of reasoning and the graces of speech, were leading away the multitude; and their doctrine, though so repugnant to the merely human in man, made far more impression than the most learned dis- quisitions on the philosophy of the day. Hence the aggrieved parties were unsparing in their ridicule and contempt, some- times engaging the Christian teachers in debate, as did the cynic Crescens, and at other times attacking them in writing, as was done by Fronto, Lucian, and Celsus. Of these writ- ings, however, it is only " The True Discourse " of Celsus that has come down to us with any sort of completeness. A brief analysis of it will give us an idea of the lines of attack followed by these philosophers. Celsus was an eclectic Platonist, and he published " The True Discourse," about 178, although in all likelihood he had em- ployed his trenchant pen against the Christians long before that date. He seems to have been a highly cultured man of the world, who took a general interest in philosophy and attacked Christianity professedly because of its opposition to the State religion. He was, however, honest enough to study its doctrines before he attacked them. His work shows that he had read the Bible and many Christian books, that he knew the difference between the Gnostic sects and the main body ^■Athenas. Supplic 3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc PAGAN OPPOSITION 109 of the Church, and that he understcxjd to some extent the relation of Christianity to the Jewish religion. Thus pre- pared he b^an his task. But, strange to say, nobody seems to have taken much notice of his book luitil about fifty j^ears later, when it fell into the hands of Origen, who thoroughly refuted it, and incidentally preserved its main contents for posterity. It has been reconstructed as follows: After a general introduction, the author divides his subject into four parts. In the first part he tries to refute Christianity from the Jewish point of view. Here the principal figure is a Jew, who endeavors to show that the Messianic prophecies contained in the Old Testament have not been verified in Christ. In the second part he speaks in his own person, as a pagan philosopher, attacking the Messianic idea directly, thus rejecting both the Christian and the Jewish religion as based upon a false foundation. In the third part he singles out special doctrines and moral precepts, trying to prove Uiat they have been borrowed from other religious systems. Hence, even if the teaching of Christianity is in part deserving of respect, this is no commendation of the Christian religion itself. In the fourth part he argues that in any case the State religion must be accepted, since it has come down frcan antiquity and is necessary for the well-being of the State. There is a close resemblance between this argumentation of Celsus and that of modem Rationalists, and the refutation of it by Origen is as timely to-day as it was some seventeen hundred years ago. Many new adversaries of Christianity arise as time passes on, but in their stock of objections there is little that is really new. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER VII SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS AND THEIR LITERARY ACTIVITIES ^ From the very first preaching of the Gospel, and in every place where the message of Christ had been accepted, Christian communities took a decided stand against all teaching that came in conflict with the doctrine announced by the Apostles. The author of the Didache, Hermas, Ignatius, and Polycarp, were as definite in their denunciations of heretical pretensions as had been the Apostles themselves in similar circumstances. However, it was only when men who had been trained in philosophy, and whose lives were more or less devoted to literary labors, had entered the Church, that a formal defense of Christianity was taken up against its many and persistent adversaries. These men, because of the task they set them- selves, were already in ancient times spoken of as Apologists. The chief aim of these Apologists, as gathered from their own writings, was to clear Christians from the reproach of crimes attributed to them under the influence of prejudice, to obtain for them tolerance and a fair application of the State laws, and to show that the doctrines they professed rightly claimed the attention, respect, and even the assent of thought- ful minds. In addition to this, they also vigorously opposed all deformation of Christian truths by dreaming heretics, and they consequently had many an opportunity of expounding the contents of the faith in accordance with the teaching of the Church. A few of them, like Justin and Aristo, also ^ Cfr. Tixeront, H. D. I, 123-139; von Jesu! Christus; Picard, L'Apol- Duchesne. The Early History of tlie ogie d'Aristide; Batiffol, Prunitive Church, I, iitS-156; Bardenhewer, CBtholicism, 192-197. Patrol 44-?o ; Feder, Juatiiu Lehre DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS m directed their efforts against the Jews, partly for polemical and partly for doctrinal reasons. As may be inferred from references to their works in ancient writers, there was quite a large number of early Christian authors who devoted their literary ability to the defense of the faith, and who are therefore rightly numbered among the Apologists. In the present connection, however, only those can be taken notice of whose works, either whole or in part, are still extant. They are the following, arranged as far as possible in chronolc^ical order: 1°. Aristides of Athens, a philosopher, who between 156 and 161 sent an apology to the Emperor Antoninus Pius. 2°. St. Justin Martyr, a native of Palestine. After the manner of philosophers in those days, he wandered from place to place, seeking and dispensing wisdom, until, between 163 and 167, he died a martyr's death in Rome. He was the author of many works, but those still extant are only his First Apology to Antoninus Pius his Second Apology, whidi seems to be supplement to the preceding, and his Dialogue with the Jew Trypho. They were written about the middle of the second century, but the exact date of their composition is not known. ^''. Tatian the Assyrian, a phi]os<^her, and disciple of St. Justin. Shortly after his conversion to the faith, about 165, he published an apolc^y entitled Oratio ad Grtecos, which is, in effect, a criticism of Hellenism. He also composed a so- called diatesseron, a Gospel'karmony, of which many frag- ments are still extant. Before his death he fell away from the faith and became a Gnostic. 4°. Melito, bishop of Sardis in Lydia, who died about 190. He was a most prolific writer, but of all his many works only a few fragments remain. 5°. Athenagoras, "the Christian Philosopher of Athens." He is the author of an apology presented to the Emperors Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus Commodus, under the title, Supplicatio seu Legatio pro Christianis. He also wrote a work on the resurrection of the dead. The apology was composed about 177 ; the date of the second work is not known. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 112 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES 6°. Theophiius, bishop of Antioch, the sixth successor of St. Peter. He wrote the three books Ad Autolycum, wherein he explains to his friend Autolycus, still a pagan, the nature of the Christian faith and of the invisible God, shows up the folly of pagan idolatry, and refutes the various charges brought against the Christians. The probable date of the work is about 170. 7°. The unknown author of the "Letter to Diognetus." The letter was probably written some time in the second cen- tury, but the exact date has not been ascertained. It is a reply to certain questions asked by a heathen much interested in Christianity. These questions deal chiefly with the Christian adoration of God, as distinguished from the pagan and Jewish worship, and with the remarkable change of life observed in converts to Christianity. 8". Minucius Felix, a Roman jurist He is the authOT of an apology entitled Octavius. It is in the form of a dia- logue, the interlocutors being the Christian Octavius Janu- arius and the heathen Oecilius Natalis. Csecilius defends the religion of his fathers, whilst Octavius pleads the cause of Christianity. It ends up with the conversion of Caecilius. The work was probably written in the last quarter of the second century. 9°. Tertullian, a priest of Carthage in Africa. Besides numerous other works, which will be considered in a subse- quent chapter, he addressed a defense of Christianity to the governors of the Roman Empire, under the title Apologeti- cum. It was written in 197, and is a refutation of the various charges brought against the Christians. Taking into account the many worics that have been lost, although their authors are known, one catmot help realizing how very considerable was the literary activity displayed in these early ages of the faith. To a great extent, no doubt, this was owing to the difficult position in which Christians found themselves; but it also shows that they had in their midst an ample supply of men who were able to defend the faith, not only by laying down their lives, but equally as well by wielding a trenchant pen. If ever there had beoi a time DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS 113 when none but " women and children and timid souls " ioU lowed the teaching of the Gospel, as some of the early adver- saries of Christianity contended, that time was certainly past. A — Defense op Christian Morals: Christianity AND Philosophy The teaching of the Apologists may be divided into three parts. They first of all refute the charges of immorality and atheism brought against the Christians by the excited popu- lace and by scoffing philosophers. Then they point out the relation of Christianity to philosophy and to the various reli- gions then in vogue. Lastly they expound Christian teaching by the aid of tradition and sound philosophical principles. Not that this order is always observed by the individual writers, but the three points here mentioned form the burden of nearly all the works now under consideration. In answer to the charges brought against the Christians, they simply point to the facts of Christian life and faith, which any one of the accusers may investigate if so disposed. These facts show that Christians are neither atheists, nor enemies of the State, nor libertines. But the trouble is that they are con- demned unheard, against the explicit provision of the law ; and, worse still, the very crimes of which their accusers them- selves are guilty are laid to their charge. They observe the law of Christ, and He bids them to worship God, to lead pure lives, to love dieir enemies, to be kind to the poor and forsaken, and to practice all manner of virtues. A sample of this kind of defense may be taken from the^ apology of Aristides, which is illustrative of what is found in the other authors. " The Christians," he says, " derive their origin from Jesus Christ our Lord. He is believed to be the Son of the Most High God. . . . He appeared to men that He might draw them away from the error of polytheism. . . . These, then, are the men who, above all other nations, on earth, have found the truth. For they acknowledge God, together with His only-begotten Son and the Holy Spirit, as the author and fashioner of all things, and beside Him they worship no other god. They have tlw commandments of DigiLizedbyGoOglc 114 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Jesus Christ engraven on their hearts, and they keep them. They do not defile themselves with adultery and the crime of fornication, do not give false testimony, covet not what be- longs to others; they honor father and mother, love the neighbor, render just judgment; what they do not wish that others should do them, neither will they do it to others ; those by whom they are injured they forgive and try to make their friends; they do good to their enemies, are gentle and easy of access; from all unlawful intercourse and impurity they keep themselves free; they do not despise the widow, nor grieve the orphan, but gladly come to the help of the needy; they receive the stranger under their roof and rejoice in his coming as if he were a brother; for they call one another brother not by reason of the flesh but of the spirit; for the sake of Christ they are ready to lay down their lives, because they steadfastly observe His precepts, living holily and justly, as the Lord has commanded Uiem." ' With regard to the relation of Christianity and pagan phi- losophy there are found among the Apologists different views, as was also the case with the later Fathers. Some of them, like Tatian and TertuUian, spoke as a rule in rather disparaging terms of the works of heathen philosophers; whilst the ma- jority saw in the pre-Christian strivings aftei wisdom a provi- dential preparation for the sublimer doctrines of revealed truth. They found many points of contact, and sometimes even of identity, between the teaching of Christianity and that of the best philosophers of the various schools. Of course, Christianity, receiving its truths from divine revela- tion and being supported by divine authority, presents them more clearly and establishes them more firmly ; but in this it confirms rather than sets aside what the gropings of philosophy had brought to light in the days of old. Of this coincidence and partial identity of certain truths, as taught respectively by the Christian religion and pagan philosophy, two explanations are ofEered, The one, already made use of by the Alexandrian Jews and adopted rather ■Arisdd, 15. DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS 115 wtddy in Christian circles, simply asserted that the p^^an philosophers had somehow become acquainted with the con- tents of the Old Testament and had drawn therefrom the truths set forth in their own teaching." In a few individual cases this might perhaps be so, but as a general rule it could not be sustained. Hence a second explanation was advanced, which found an especially staunch advocate in St. Justin. It is briefly as follows: According to St. John, the Word is " the true light, which enlighteneth every man that cometh into this world." Hence the Word of God, who is light and life, was in the world from the very beginning; not in visible form, not as a God-Man, but in His invisible communication with the souls of men. Among the Jews He spoke by the Prophets and inspired the sacred writers, whilst among the pagans He enlightened the minds of the philosophers and directed their teaching. It is true, the enlightenment and direction votichsafed the philoso- phers was imperfect ; it was not real inspiration, and hence they taught many errors ; nevertheless, whatever truth is found in their works had its source in Him. Hence between Chris- tian teaching and true philosophy, no matter to what period of time it belongs, there can be no real opposition ; for both proceed from the Word, although each in a different way.* This seems to be the meaning of the various passages found in the writings of St Justin in reference to the matter in question. Here and there it may appear that he held real inspiration in the case of philosophers as well as in that of the sacred writers; but when all he says on the subject is taken into account, this cannot be held. For the enlighten- ment of which he speaks is, in varying degrees, vouchsafed to all men, and each one receives it according to his capacity, whilst in real inspiration the capacity of the recipient does not limit the divine action.' B — Exposition of Christian Doctbinb In their exposition of Christian doctrine the Apol<^sts do ; Thcoph, DigiLizedbyGoOglc Ii6 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES not touch upon all truths taught by the Church at the time, but they are fairly comprehensive, and so their writings form a valuable source of information on matters appertaining to the History of Dogmas. Their arguments, besides such as philosophy supplied them with, arc taken indiscriminately from the Old and the New Testament. Both are accepted by them as containing the word of God. It was the Holy Spirit who directed the sacred writers, and He vouches for the truth of their statements. "The Prophets," writes Athenagoras, " were transported out of themselves, and, im- pelled by the Holy Spirit, they spoke those things wherewith they were inspired, the Holy Ghost using them even as a flute player uses his flute." ' When writing against their pagan adversaries, they had frequent occasion for proving the existence of one supreme God, which they usually did by having recourse to the argu- ment of causality, or to the teleological argument drawn from the marvelous order observed in the universe. " He alone is God," exclaims Theophilus, " who separates the li^t from the darkness, who established the depths of the abyss, and marked the bounds of the sea." ' They are quite commonly accused by their critics of over- emphasizing God's transcendence and His incomprehensibility to the human mind, but this criticism does not appear alto- gether just They were certainly very far removed from making of God a mere abstraction, as cUd some of the Greek philosophers before them; and also from placing Him in isolated grandeur beyond all contact with the world of His own creation, as did the Gnostics whose theories they rejected as absurd. They ascribe to Him in a preeminent d^ree the f ulbess of all physical and moral perfections ; He is a God who loves all His creatures, who provides for them, and guides them in all their ways. " Him I call God," writes Aristides, " who created and preserves all things, who is without begin- ning, eternal, immortal, who stands in need of nothing, and is far above all perturbations and defects." Or as Theophilus • Supplic p. • ApoL I. DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS 117 words it : " God derives His name from the fact that He is the source of all stability in this changeable world, and the fountainhead of all action and life. He is without b^inning, immutable, immortal; sustaining, ruling, and caring for all things. He is the creator and author of all beings, and His majesty is known and understood from the greatness of His works." • Against both pagan philosophers and Gnostic sectaries they explicitly defend the creation of the world out of nothing, " jussu Dei," and very definitely reject the idea of an eterrml hyle as postulated by Plato.'*^ Nor is this Creator-God an inferior power, a demiurge, but the supreme God Himself, besides whom there is no other God.'^ Hamack, Tixeront, and many others who have written on this subject, point out that the Apologists shrink from bringing the all-perfect God into immediate contact with the finite and the change- able; and that therefore, like Plato and Philo, they postulate an intermediary, a minister, through whom He pronounces the creative fiat. The fact that they do postulate such an intermediary is certain, but whether they were guided in so doing by their exaggerated notion of an all-transcendent God, as these authors maintain, is not so clear. They had before them the teaching of St. John, that " in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God," and " all things were made by Him, and without Him was made nothing that was made." ^" This contains the fundamental elements of their doctrine on creation, and all they did was to evolve these elements along philosophical lines. At the same time, however, it may be conceded, and is indeed highly probable, that in the concept of the Creator- Word they sought to combine the traditional teaching of the Church and the postulates of long established philosophical systems. Most of tfiem, as already indicated, had received their early training in the philosophical schools of the day, and it was but natural that this training should influence them in their efforts to give a rational setting to the truths of faith. Within certain limits ' Ad Autoljc. i, 4. " Ibid. »IWd. 3, 4; Amtid. 1, 4. "John, i, i, 3. DigiLized by Google Ii8 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES this was, of course, quite legitimate, but in some respects thejr seem to have gone beyond these limits. For they introduced certain views, at least as far as the wording goes, which were later on found to be more or less out of harmony with the mind of the Church. We may instance the apparent sub- ordination of the Word and the Holy Spirit to the Father, not only as regards their origin, but also in reference to the perfection of their being. Of this point, however, something more will be said in another paragraph. First, then, they accepted from the traditional teaching of the Church the unity of God in the strictest sense of the term; and this God they held to be identical with the God of the Old Testament. Hence Justin could say with perfect truth to his friend Trypho: "Neither will there ever be, O Trypho, nor has there been from the beginning, another God besides Him who created and orderly disposed the universe. Nor do we hold that there is one God for us and another for you ; but that very one we consider to be God, who led your fathers out of the land of Egypt. . . . Neither do we hope in any other, for there is no other, but in Him in whom you also hope, the God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob." ^' And yet, notwithstanding his emphatic statement that there is only one God, Justin does not hesitate to tell his friend that there is another one to whom this name applies. " I shall endeavor," he says, " to convince you, since indeed you under- stand the Scriptures, of what I say, namely, that there is and is said to be under the Creator of all things another God and Lord, who is also called Angel, because He announces to men whatever the Creator of all things wishes to make known to them." " True, there is only one God, but in this one God there is " another God and Lord." Nor is there a contradiction in this; for the author says: " Referring to the Scriptures, I shall try to convince you, that this very one who is said to have appeared to Abraham and Jacob and Moses, and who is taught in the Scripture to be God, is another besides Him who created all things — another, "WaL II. "IWd. s6. DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS 119 I say, numerically, not in sense," that is, in being.*' So there are not really two Gods, but two divine terms, and they are one God. How is this to be explained? The author tells us a little further on. " By another testimony from the Scriptures I shall also prove to you, my friends, that in the beginning, before all created things, God brought forth from His own self a certain rational power, which by the Holy Spirit is also called the glory of God, and again the Son, Wisdom, Angel, God, the Lord and Word," " God, therefore, has a Son, begotten of His own self, who for that reason is also God. He is indeed said to be " a certain rational power," " the glory of God," and " wisdom," but not in an impersonal sense ; for He is distinct from the Creator, not in name only, but numeri- cally. " Not as the light is in name only distinct from the sun, but numerically He is something else." " Hence those " who say that the Son is The Father, are convicted of error; because neither do they know the Father, nor are they aware that the Father of all things has a Son. And He, as He is the first-begotten Word of God, is also God." ** The Word, then, is begotten by the Father ; brought forth by him as His Son. How is this to be understood? The author tries to illustrate it by two examples, which, whilst they are necessarily inadequate, still make clear his mind. The first is taken from human speech. Thought may be considered as a mental word, conceived by the mind, and when we utter it, we in a manner bring it forth. In this there is no severing of parts, nor are we by this utterance deprived of the mental word. In some such manner must we under- stand the divine generation of the Word of God. He re- mains in the Father and is one with the Father, and yet He is distinct. The second example is taken from a fire at which another fire is lit Although it communicates itself, yet it is not thereby diminished, but remains in the same state in which it was before. Similarly in the generation of the Word the DigiLizedbyGoOglc 120 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Father indeed communicates His being to the Son, but He does so without changed" When did this generation take place ? St. Justin says, " in the beginning," " before all things created." ** Does this mean eternity in the strict sense of the term? The author does not say so in so many words, but there can be no doubt that this is his meaning. For the source of the Word's di- vinity is precisely His generation by the Father,'^ so that His divine sonship is necessarily coextensive in duration with His divinity, and therefore obviously from all eternity. Whatever may be said in other texts about a sort of second generation in view of the creation of the world, it is sufficiently plain that in the author's mind this had no bearing upon the divine sonship of the Word. He was Word and Son and God before all ages, in every respect coeternal with the Father, And what St. Justin thus sets forth with considerable atten- tion to details, we find in substance also advanced by the other Apologists, Thus Athenagoras, although strongly emphasiz- ing the absolute oneness of Grod,^* points out to his pagan readers that this one God has a Son, the Word, through whom He created and disposed alt things. And though distinct from the Father, because He is the Son, He is nevertheless one with the Father. The Son is in the Father, and the Father is in the Son, through the union and the power of the Spirit." Similarly Theophilus, who says that " the Word was always existing in the heart of God. Before anything was made, the Word was the counselor of the Creator." ** " And this the Holy Scriptures teach us, and as many as were inspired by the Holy Spirit, among whom was John, saying: ' In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God,' thus teaching that in the beginning God alone was and in Him was the Word. Then he adds : ' And the Word was God, all things were made by Him, and without Him nothing was made.' The Word, therefore, as He is God and bom pf '• Dial. 6t. " Leg. pro Christ, a *• Ibid. 48,61,62; cfr. II ApoL 6. '* Ibid. 10. "1 1 Apol. 63. ** Ad Autolyc. 2, 22. DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS 121 God, the Father of all things sends into whatever place He wishes." *' The same views we find expressed in the Letter to Di(^- netus, the unknown author of which calls Christ the beloved, the proper, the only begotten Son of God ; the holy and incom- prehensible Logos, who is not an angel, but the creator and fashioner of Ae universe. The Father sent Him into the world both as God and as man, that He might call all men to salvation.** He is the proper Son of God, given for the re- demption of us all ; the holy, the incorruptible, the immortal." He is the Word of God, who was from the beginning, the eternal, who is ever bom again in the hearts of the saints." Again, Aristides tells his readers that Christians derive their name from our Lord Jesus Christ. " He is confessed to be the Son of the most high God, who in the Holy Spirit descended from heaven for the salvation of men. . . . They acknowledge the Creator and Fashioner of all things in His only-begotten Son and the Holy Spirit, and besides Him they venerate no other god." " Melito of Sardis says that the same Christ is both God and man, having two natures, the divine and the human ; and although here on earth He hid His divinity under the lowliness of the flesh, He is neverthe- less true and eternal God.*" Even Tatian, who, as we shall see below, has some very strange expressions, states quite plainly : " God was in the beginning, and the beginning we understand to be the power of the Word. ... By Him and by the Word, who was in Him, all things were sustained. . . . The Word was bom by a communication, not by abscission. . . . Similarly as when from one torch many fires are lit. . . . Thus the Word, proceeding from the power of the Father, did not cause Him to be without the Word." '* Gathering alt this together, it appears that regarding the matter in question three points were quite clear and fixed in the minds of the Apologists, i ". That there is only one ••Ibid. »ApoI. 15. "•Ad Di<^n«t 6, 11; 7. Tngm.7. " Ibid 9, 2, 4. ■■ Adv. Graecos, S- **Ibid. 11,3 iqq. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 122 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES true God, eternal and unchangeable. 2°. That the Word is in a proper sense the Son of God, distinct from the Father as Sberd taught me that the Book of Life is worthy of DigiLizedbyGoOglc 136 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES belief. And to Rome he sent me to contemplate majesty, and to see a queen golden-robed and golden-sandalled ; there also I saw a people having a shining mark. And I saw. the land of Syria and all its cities. Nisibis I saw, when I passed over the Euphrates. But everywhere I had brethren. I had Paul. . . . (the last part of the sentence is missing). Faith every- where ted me forward, and everywhere provided as my food a fish of exceeding great size and perfect, which a holy virgin drew with her hands from a fountain — and this faith ever gives to its friends to eat ; having also wine of great virtue, and giving it mingled with bread. These things I, Abercius, having been witness of them, ordered to be written here. Verily I was passing through my seventy-second year. He that discemeth these things, a fellow-believer, let him pray for Abercius, And no one shall place another grave over my grave; but if he do, he shall pay to the treasury of the Romans two thousand pieces of gold and to my good native city of Hieropolis one thousand pieces of gold." This is only an inscription on the tomb of a second century Christian bishop, yet its few lines are, crowded with informa- tion on matters of doctrine and religious practice. Baptism marks the Christian with a shining seal, the Church is spread everywhere, and everywhere its members are brethren. Rome is the place where "majesty" dwells; obviously a reference to the preeminence of that Church. Christians are the flock of Christ the Holy Shepherd, who bears witness that the con- tents of the Holy Books are true. Faith provides spiritual food, a large and perfect fish, the symbol of Christ, who is the Son of a Holy Virgin, Not all understand the meaning of this, but fellow-believers do ; and for them it is meet to pray for the dead. 3°. The Muratorian Canon, so named from its discoverer, L. A. Muratori, contains the oldest known list of books making up the New Testament. The beginning is missing, and the first line of the preserved text refers to the second Gospel. Then are mentioned the third and fourth Gospels, of Luke and John respectively, the Acts of the Apostles, the First Epistle of St. John, thirteen Letters of St Paul — two of which, one DigiLizedbyGoOglc SECOND-CENTURY APOLOGISTS 137 to the Laodiceans and one to the Alexandrians, are rejected as spurious — the Epistle of Jude, two other Epistles of St. John, his Apocalypse, and the Apocalypse of St. Peter. All these, with the two exceptions indicated above, are acknowl- edged as canonical; whilst the Shepherd of Hernias and a number of Gnostic and Montanistic writings are rejected. The Shepherd, however, may be read, but not publicly in the church. Likewise the Apocalypse of St. Peter is not univer- sally received. Of our canonical New Testament books the two Epistles of St. Peter, the Epistle of St. James, and the Letter to the Hebrews, are not mentioned; yet the value of the document consists not so much in the completeness of the list of books it contains, but rather in the statement that the books there enumerated are received as genuine in the " Catho- lic Church." Practically, therefore, some fifty years after the death of St. John, the canon of New Testament writings was fixed. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER VIII THE TEACHING OF ST. IREN.EUS AND ST. HIPPOLYTUSi St. Irenseus is usually associated with a group of writers called Antignostics. This title is applied to them because of their strenuous opposition to the Gnostic heresy, which they regarded as a special menace to the Church. There was quite a large number of them, mostly Asiatics, but the works of nearly all have perished. Ircnaeus was a prolific writer, as is seen from the frequent references to his literary activity by ancient authors. He was, moreover, a man whose opinion was highly valued by his contemporaries and Jjy those who came after him; but, as happened in the case of so many other great men in those early times, most of his literary pro- ductions have fallen a prey to the calamities of subsequent ages. Aside from a few fragments, only two of his works have come down to ys. One is a small treatise preserved in an Armenian translation, only recently discovered, under the title. Demonstration of Apostolic Preaching. The other is his great work in five books, entitled, Against Heresies. The heresies in question refer chiefly to the different Gnostic sys- tems, of which he appears to have had intimate and first-b^d knowledge. However, the scope of this great work is not limited to mere polemics. " Whilst refuting the Gnostic error, it ex- pounds the theory of the Church and of her doctrinal func- tions with such fullness and firmness that the third book is a veritable treatise on the Church, and the oldest in existence." As a faithful follower of the Good Shepherd, to whom every iCfr. Dufourcq, Saint Ir£nie; Church, 303-253; Tixcront, H. D. Doellirger, Hjppolytus and Callis- L 229-240; D'Alis, Thiologie de tus; BatiffoL Pmnitive Catholicism, Saint Hippolyte. 164-345;* Durell. The Historic 138 DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. IREN^EUS AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 139 stray sheep is dear, Irenseus did not aim at discomfiting adver- saries of tht iaiih by holding up their false teaching to ridi- cule, but rather endeavored to open for them the way to the truth, by presenting a dear exposition of the traditional teaching of the Church. This is one of the reasons why it seems preferable, in our present inquiries, to study his teach- ing primarily in itself and only incidentally in its relation to Gnosticism. The other reason is that St. Irenjeus stands at the parting of the ways. After his time. Eastern and Western theological thought tended in two divergent direc- tions. Not that already at this early date the two great churches began to drift apart, owing to Eastern schismatic tendencies, for of that the first signs appeared only some two hundred years later; but circumstances of place and peculi- arities of national character brought it about that East and West were thenceforth absorbed in trying to find solutions of widely different problems. The one speculative and the other practical, they went each their own way; although these ways, for all their divergence, were closely linked by the bonds of one and the same faith. Irenjeus was bom in Asia Minor, sometime between 130 and 142, most likely at or near Smyrna. During his boyhood he often listened to St. Polycarp, for whom he professed great veneration in after years. When arrived at man's estate, he traveled westward, tarrying some time in Rome and finally taking up his permanent residence at Lyons in Gaul. In 177, during the persecution of Marcus Aurelius, he was already a priest and was made the bearer of a letter from the church of Lyons to the Pope, concerning matters connected with the Montanist heresy. Shortly after his return he was made bishop, succeeding Ponthinus, who had been martyred for the faith. It was some years after his elevation to the episcopal see of Lyons that he took a leading part in the paschal controversy. Pope Victor I (189-198), according to a statement of Euse- bius, threatened to excommunicate certain Asiatic bishops, who in spite of his admonition persisted in celebrating Easter on the " fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gos- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 140 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES pel," instead of accommodating themselves to the Roman cus- tom. Irenjeus, " in the name of those brethren in Gaul over whom he presided, wrote an epistle, in which he maintains the duty of celebrating the mystery of the resurrection of our Lord only on the day of the Lord. He becomingly also admonishes Victor not to cut off whole churches of God, who observed the tradition of an ancient custom," " And this same Irenaeus, as one whose character answered well to his name, being in this way a peacemaker, exhorted and nego- tiated such matters as these for the peace of the churches." ' From other sources also it appears that Irenaeus was a holy man and a most zealous pastor. He converted a large num- ber of the Gallic Celts to Christianity, and brought the church of Lyons to a very prosperous condition. It is commonly believed that he died a martyr's death. In non-Catholic circles it is usually put down as an historic fact, that Irenasus of Lyons was largely responsible for the evolution of the early Church, conceived as a communion of brotherly love, into authoritative Catholicism as it finds its perfect expression in the Church of Rome to-day. He it was, they say, who put an end to the Gnostic and Montanist crisis, and must be considered as " the author of the theory of such victorious principles as the authority of the rule of faith, the authority of episcopal succession, the authority of the confederation of bishops." How very unhistorical this state- ment is, and how absolutely without any foundation in fact, has recently been exhaustively shown by Mgr. Batiffol, in his excellent work on Primitive Catholicism. Furthermore, a mere glance at the preceding chapters cannot fail to convince the reader that authoritative Catholicism is as old as Chris- tianity itself. The author of the Didache, Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch, did not less firmly insist upon submis- sion of the faithful to their ecclesiastical rulers than does the twshop of Lyons. The only difference is, that circumstances forced Iremeus to bring out more clearly, than had been the case with his predecessors, the universal extent of this author- ■Ensebius, Hist, EccL s, 24. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. IREN^US AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 141 ity. But even in this he does not follow his own private no- tions; his constant ai^>eal is to the traditions handed down since the time of the Apostles, and the facts of history bear out his appeal. In making this appeal, Irenseus does not, in the first instance, have recourse to written tradition as contained in Holy Scrip- ture ; and he gives the reason. The Gnostics, when confronted with the written word, either claim, though foolishly, that they have a more perfect gospel of their own, or else they say that Catholics are too simple to understand the Gospel which they possess.' With such men one cannot argue, ex- cept by bringing before them the witness of the living Church. Incidentally, however, Irenxus bears witness to the reverence with which the Sacred Writings, of both the Old and the New Testament, were regarded by himself and his fellow- believers. They were dictated, he says, by the Word of God and His Spirit ; and the four Gospels especially determine the faith and are the norm of truth.* His writings also show that the New Testament canon was already fixed in his day. As, then, the heretics cannot be convinced by an appeal to Holy Scripture, because they either misinterpret it or oppose to it their own apocryphal gospels, he quotes against them the Rule of Faith, which every Christian receives at baptism, and which cannot be changed, -although it can be more or less perfectly understood and explained." " The Church," he says, " is indeed scattered over the whole world, extending even to the ends of the earth ; but she has received from the Apostles and their disciples one and the same faith, to wit : In one God the Father Almighty, who made heaven and earth and the sea, and all that is contained therein; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who for our salvation became flesh ; and in the Holy Ghost, who through the Prophets made known God's economy of salvation; and in the advent of the beloved Christ Jesus our Lord, His birth of the Virgin, His suffer- ings and resurrection, and His return from heaven in the glory of the Father, to restore all things and to raise all • Ibid, 3, sS, 2 ; 3, I, t ; 3, II, 8 ■Ibid. I, 9> 4; lOi 3. DigiLizedbyGoOgle 142 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES flesh from the grave, so that before Christ Jesus our Lord and God and Saviour and King, according to the good will of the invisible Father, every knee shall bend, of those in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue shall confess Him; (He shall come) to pass judgment upon all, condemning the spirits of wickedness, the disobedient and rebellious angels, as also the ungodly and unjust and evil- doers and blasphemers among men, to everlasting fire, and rewarding the just and godly, who have observed His com- mandments, whether from the beginning or since their con- version, with life and immortality and eternal glory."' This is the faith into which the children of the Catholic Church are baptized, to this her converts must subscribe. In substance it is identical with the contents of the Apostolic Creed, although here and there the lines are somewhat ex- tended. And who is at the back of this faith? Who pre- serves it and vouches for its truth? This the author tells us in the following paragraph. It is the living Church, whose very unity shows her to be the work of God. "These glad tidings," he continues, " the Church has re- ceived, and this faith she preserves with great care, so that, although scattered all over the earth, her children seem to dwell in one and the same house: this all believe with such accord that one would think they had but one heart and one soul, and this she preaches and teaches and hands down in such oneness of doctrine as if she had but one mouth. For although there are many and diverse languages in the world, nevertheless the substance of tradition is everywhere the same. The churches in Germany do not teach a different doctrine from those in Spain or those among the Celts; nor is there any difference of teaching in the churches of the Orient, in Egypt and Lybia, and in those that were founded in the center of the world: but rather as the sun, which is the work of God, is one and the same in all parts of the universe, so likewise is the preaching of the truth, enlighten- ing all men who are predestined to come to a knowledge thereof. And neither will he, among ecclesiastical superiors, * Ibid. I, to, I. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. IREN^US AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 143 who is powerftil in speech say aught else . . . nor will he who is less gifted in preaching take aught away from tra- dition." ^ Whilst the livit^ Church is thus the guardian of truth, those upon whom in the Church this duty of watching over the purity of faith chiefly falls, and from whom, in consequence, the truth may be fully ascertained, are the bishops whose suc- cession is legitimately derived from the Apostles. " All who have eyes to see," he declares, " can recognize this tradition in any one of the churches, and we can point out the succes- sion of bishops from the Apostles to our own day." " This ' uninterrupted succession of bishops in the churches founded by the Aposries warrants the truth of their teaching; for " together with the episcopal succession they also received the unfailing charism of truth." • " However, as it would be too long to enumerate the episccqwil lists of all the churches, there is one, very great, and most ancient and known to all, the church founded and established at Rome by two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul, whose tradition which it hath from the Apostles, and whose faith proclaimed unto men by a succession of bishops coming down even unto us, we point to, thereby confounding all those who in any way form undue assemblies, on account of either self-pleasing ways, or of vain glory, or of blindness and wrong opinion. For with this church, because of her higher authority, it is necessary that every church, that is, the faithful all the world over, should agree." *° Here, then, is the ultimate and all-sufhcient criterion of orthodox teaching — agreement with the church of Rome. Apostolic succession is indeed under ordinary circumstances a sufficient warrant that the truth is taught in any given church ; but instead of laboriously inquiring in each instance whether such succession can be established, it suffices to ascertain whether that particular church is in communion with Rome. That mere fact decides the question of orthodoxy. Does this mean, therefore, that the text sets forth the Prunacy of T Ibid. 1, ID, a. * Ibid 4, 26, 2, 4, 5. • Ibid. 3, 3, I- " Ibid. 3. 3, 2. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 144 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Rome in matters of faith? Such is the contention of Catholic scholars; and although Protestants usually attempt another interpretation, the obvious meaning of the text is that Rome holds a preeminence to which all Christianity must bow. Hence the strong expression: "Ad hanc Ecclesiam necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam " — it is a matter of necessity, of obligation, that every church resort to Rome in order to find the truth. Hence, too, the historical fact, that men in- terested in the true faith, as Polycarp, Justin, Tatian, Rhodon, Abercius, Irenseus, Hegesippus, Tertullian, Origen, and numer- ous others, wended their way Rome-wards; not to speak of heretics who also tried to win Rome over to their side, in order to impress the world with the truth of their doctrines. Even Hamack, speaking of Polycarp's visit to Anicetus, says very significantly : " It was not Anicetus who came to Poly- carp, but Polycarp to Anicetus." ^^ After thus pointing out the authoritative position of the church of Rome, Irenseus gives the succession of bishops, from " the Blessed Apostles, who founded and builded the church," to Linus, Anencletus, Qement, Evaristus, Alexan- der, Sixtus, Telesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, Soter, and Eleu- therius, then occupying the see. Under the guidance of these bishops, " the Tradition which is of the Apostles hath ever been preserved." The safeguarding of the truth in the Church is, furthermore, assured for all times; because the Church is assisted in her teaching by the Spirit of God. It is He who renews her preaching, even as an exquisite deposit preserved in a goodly vessel, which keeps the vessel itself from becoming old. " He is the gift conferred by God on His Church, just as God imparted to Adam. His creature, the breath of life, in order that it might vivify his members." Whoso, then, does not hasten to the Church, cannot pos- sess the Spirit of God. " For where the Church is, there also is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church and all grace: but the Spirit is truth." " ** Dogmengeschichte, I, 488. »• Adv. Hxres. 3, ^ t> 3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. IREN.EUS AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 145 Over against this unity of faith in the Church, and its unfail- ing transmission by a divinely constituted au^ority and the guiding influence of the Holy Spirit, Irenseus places the end- less variations and contradictions of the Gnostics. Among them there is no standard of truth, and every one makes his own doctrine for himself; they resemble the pagan schools of philosophy. They are sophists forever doomed to varia- tions of every sort, tossed about by the waves of their errors, having no rock whereon to rest their edifice: nothing but moving sand. Thus truth can no longer be recognized. For if to-day we must look for it in the system of Cerinthus, to- morrow in that of Valentinian, then in that of Basilides, or Marcion, all of which contradict one another, how shall we know the truth? Can any one imagine a truth that varies? ^" Besides this rather full and explicit teaching on the Church and the Rule of Faith, which, however, has been cited only in part, St. Irenxus touches on nearly all points of doctrine taught by the Church. Yet for brevity's sake most of this may be omitted ; for as he is very conservative, he rarely goes beyond his predecessors in the development of any particular doctrine. Still the following points ought to be noted : 1°. Arguing against the Gnostics, who ascribed the crea- tion of the world to a demiurge, he insists that there is only one God, and that this God is Himself the Creator. He is the God of both the Old and the New Testament, the only God, holy, just, and merciful.^* 2*. In answer to the Gnostics' contention that the supreme God, who is all-good, cannot be the author of evil, he points to the fact that whatever evil there is in the world has its origin in the abuse of man's freedom, whence also resulted the original fall. Of his very nature man is limited in per- fection, and he must perfect himself by obedience.*' Instead of doing this, Adam disobeyed, and in him the whole race was guilty of disobedience." Here we have a rather clear statement of the doctrine of original sin, we too being " debtors to Him whose commandment also we transgressed »• Ibid. 3, 2, I, 2. »' Ibid 4, 37. 1-3. "Ibid 3, 24, i; ^ I, 1, 3. "Ibid. S. 16. 3- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 146 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES originally." In this connection the author draws a rigorous parallel between Adam and Christ; through the one we fell and through the other we were raised to a new life. Else- where he draws a similar parallel between Eve and Mary, referring to the former as the cause of our death and to the latter as the source of salvation and our advocate. '^ 3°. Although there is only one God, the Father of all, still the Son is also true God, " God in a dcfiMte and absolute sense of the word." " " By the Son, therefore, who is in the Father, and hath in Him the Father, He who is, is declared to be God; the Father bearing witness to the Son, and the Son announcing the Father." " Besides the Father and the Son there is also the Holy Ghost, who is eternal, the Wisdom of God, and His Image. He and the Son took part in the creation of man, and He dwells in our body as in His temple.** 4°. In his Christology and soteriology, both of which are rather fully developed, the author brings out clearly the union of the human and the divine in Christ. Precisely bow this union is to be explained he does not know ; but of the fact that there is a most intimate union he is certain. It was the Word of God, the Only-Begotten of the Father, our Lord Jesus Christ, who saved us : the Incarnate Word was suspended on the cross.*' His very office of Redeemer required that He should be both God and man; so that He might mediate be- tween heaven and earth, and conquer the devil justly."' He was man to be tempted. Word to be glorified.*' 5". Our spiritual regeneration is effected through baptism; therein we are bom again and receive the Holy Ghost." Baptism is also administered to little children.*' Christians must share in the fruits of the redemption through faith in Jesus Christ. This faith, however, is not merely an assent of the mind, but also a fulfillment of flie Lord's precepts." 6". The Holy Eucharist he clearly teaches to be the body "Ibid. 3, 23.4:5,19,1. ""Ibid. 3. r8, ?; 5, i, i. "Ibid. 3, 6, I, 3. "Ibid. 3, 19, 2, 3. *' Ibid. 3, 6, 2. " Ibid I, 21, 1 ; 3, 17, a, 3. •"Ibid. 5, la, 2; 4, 7, 4; 4, aOr >• "Ibid. 2, 32, 4. "Ibid.3.16, 9:5. 18*1. MIbid.4.fll.7;4.6.S. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. IREN^US AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 147 and Uood of the Saviour, into which the bread and wine are changed by the invocation of God. Having established this, he draws from it an argument gainst the Gnostics, refuting their contentions that material creatures are evil, that God cannot have made them, and that the body shall not rise again. This argument presupposes that the Gnostics also admitted the Real Presence. " How," asks Irenseus, " can they be certain that the bread over which the Eucharistic words have been spoken is the Lord's body, and the chalice is His blood, if they confess not that He is the Son of the Creator, His Word, through whom the trees bear their fruit, the fountains gush forth, and the earth produces first the blade, then the ear, and then the full-grown wheat in the ear? How again do they say that our bodies shall be dissolved in corruption and not receive life, since they are nourished with the body and blood of the Lord? Therefore let them either change their mind or abstain from making the aforesaid oblation." " Catholics, on the other hand, are perfectly consistent, believing as they do in the Real Presence and in the resurrection of the body. " For even as the bread, which is of the earth, is no longer common bread after receiving the invocation of God, but the Eucharist, consisting of two elements, the one earthly and the other heavenly ; so in a similar manner our bodies receiv- ing the Eucharist are no longer corruptible, but have the hope of a future resurrection." ** Hence not only Catholics, but Gnostics as well, firmly be- lieved in the Real Presence, although these latter distorted the doctrine to suit their own peculiar tenets. The same must be said about the Eucharist as a true sacrifice, since from this aspect, also accepted by the Gnostics, Irenasus proves to than that matter cannot be evil, because bread and wine, the ele- ments of consecration, are material creatures.** In connection with this he reminds them that the Eucharist is the clean obla- tion spoken of by the Prophet Malachy, and that the Apostles, following the Master's direction, caused it to be offered throughout the world." "■ Ibid. 4, 18, 4; cfr. 5, a, 2. ** Ibid. 4. »8, 5. «IbiA4.i^S ••IKd. 4, 17. 5. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 148 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES 7°. Penance restores the truly repentant to peace, to the friendship of God, and to communion. Incidentally the au- thor also refers to public penance and to confession, but he gives no particulars. The heretic Cerdon, he says in one place, did public penance before the Church during the pontifi- cate of Hyginus ; '^ and in another place he relates how at Lyons in Gaul certain women, who had been seduced by the Gnostics, despaired of salvation, because they were asfcuned to confess their sins, whilst others who had committed the same sin did penance and were restored to communion." S°. The author's eschatological views are somewhat pecu- liar. He holds that the soul of Christ had to remain in limbo until the third day when He rose from the dead, and so must also the souls of the just remain in an invisible place until they shall be reunited to their bodies. "• There will be first a resurrection of the just alone, who are to reign with Jesus Christ during a thousand years and enjoy all the blessings of the Millennium.'* He admits indeed that others do not be- lieve in this doctrine, but with them he has little patience. Then, after the thousand years have come to an end, the gen- eral resurrection and the judgment will take place.*" The punishment of the wicked, as well as the reward of the just, shall be everlasting,'" Thus with the exception of a few minor points, concerning which he gives his own personal views, the author's exposi- tion of Catholic doctrine is most satisfactory. His claim that he is guided by the tradition of the Apostles is borne out by almost every statement contained in his great work. And his witness to this tradition is all the more important as he knew from his own personal experience what was the teaching of the different churches on the points in question. Educated in Asia Minor, visiting Rome on several occasions, the chief pas- tor of Christianity in Gaul, he came during his life in contact with representative Christians from all over the world, and among them not a few whose memories, like his own, reached »' Ibid. 3, 4, 3. " Ibid. s. 32-35. "Ibid. 1, 6, 3; I, 13, 7. "Ibid. 2, 33, 5; S. 32, I- *■ Ibid 5, 31, 2. ■* Ibid. 4, sS, 2; $• 36, ». DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. IREN.EUS AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 149 back to the time of the ApostoHc Fathers. A better witness to Apostolic tradition could hardly be found. By way of supplement to the teaching of St. Irenaeus, a few remarks may here be made about the doctrinal views of Hip- polytus of Rome, who, according to Photius (Bibl. cod. 121), was a disciple of the bishop of Lyons towards the end of the second century. He was an exegete rather than a theolt^an, still his occasional observations on dogmatic points are of considerable value, especially as they record the views then entertained in the capital city of Christendom. He was a voluminous writer, but most of his works have perished. Of the eighteen books mentioned by St. Jerome, only two are complete, the treatise Contra Noetum and the Philosophumena. This latter, which is a refutation of various heresies, was for a long time ascribed to some unknown author of the third century, but it is now commonly admitted to be the work of Hippolytus. The teaching of this disciple of Irenseus, as gathered from the above-mentioned two works and from fragments of his other books, may be briefly summarized as follows: 1°. " God is one, first and alone, the Creator and Lord of all things, without anything coeval with Himself." " " There was noUiing besides Himself ; He was alone, and yet He was manifold. For He was not without His Word, without wis- dom, without power, without counsel. All these were in Him: He Himself was all. When He willed, and as He willed. He manifested the Word at a time determined by Himself: through the Word He made all things." '* " Of all beings the Word alone was generated by Him." "' " His Word is from Himself ; therefore also God, since He is the substance of God." " " And thus there was present with Him another one. But when I say another, I do not say two gods; but the Word proceeded from Him as light izom light, as water from a fountain, as a ray from the sun. For there is one power which proceeds from the whole ; but the whole is the Father " Philosoph. lOi 3a. •• Coat. Noet la DigiLizedbyGoOglc I50 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES and the power proceeding from the whole is the Word." ** " Christ is God over all things." ** All this is rather archaic, as far as the expressions go, but the doctrine is perfectly clear and orthodox. The author has no doubt whatever about the oneness of God, the true divinity of the Word, and the consubstantiality of the Word with the Father. However, he is less satisfactory when he comes to speak of the Word's divine sonship, as a few citations will show. 2". "What manner of Son did God send into the world through the Incarnation, except His Word, whom He called Son in view of His future birth? And when He is called Son, it is because of His love towards men. For the Word, apart from the flesh and in Himself, was not truly Son, al- though He was truly the only-begotten Word." ** Hence the divine sonship of the Word seems to depend, at least for its perfection, on the Incarnation. However, in this there ap- pears to be a question of the name rather than of the under- lying reality; for the Word was bom of the Father before liie creation of the world, and was even then His Son. 3°. The Word Incarnate is both perfect God and perfect man. The union between the human and the divine is so intimate that without the Word the human nature could not exist. "Neither could the flesh exist by itself and without the Word ; for it has its subsistence in the Word." ** On the other hand, the human nature was not merged into the divinity ; for " we must believe that God the Word descended from heaven into the holy Vii^n Mary, so that He might become Incarnate in her, taking a rational soul and being made in all things like unto us, sin alone excepted." *' Even as man He " is one Son of God," yet at the same time both God and man. Hence the unity of person and the distinction of the two na- tures in Christ is clearly maintained by the author. 4°. The personal distinction of the Holy Ghost is hardly touched upon by Hippolytus; but this is easily explained, as Cont. Noet ir. **IWd. 'Phitosoph. 10, 34. Cont Noet is- « Ibil 17. D,j.,.db,Googlc ST. IREN^US AND ST. HIPPOLYTUS 151 the works that have come down to us are almost entirely con- troversial, and the controversy was not about the Holy Ghost but about the Son. Incidentally, however, the Holy Spirit is represented as one of the Trinity, being associated with the Father and the Son in the same Godhead.*" 5°. " God the Word became man that He might save him who had fallen, and bestow immortality upon all those who would believe in His name." " The Incarnate Word is the new man, in whom the old Adam is restored to newness of life.** By His sufferings and death He paid our ransom and merited for us a title to incorruptibility and glory.*' 6"^. Of the Church the author sp^ks only in passing, but he bears witness to the fact that she was then called Catholic in opposition to heretical sects. She is the gathering of the saints, the assemblage of the faithful who live in justice. To be a true member thereof one mu3t have practical faith, which shows Itself in the observance of God's commandments.** 7". Entrance into the Church is through baptism, which effects the forgiveness of sins and a spiritual regeneration.'^ The newly baptized are confirmed, and thus receive the Holy Spirit." The faithful are nourished with the flesh and blood of the Saviour, which is offered in every place and among all nations as the great sacrifice of the New Law." To the Church has been entrusted the power of forgiving sins com- mitted after baptism, but there are somt grievous offenses which she should not pardon.'* It was on account of this rigorism that the author was so bitterly opposed to Pope Cal- listus, on which point something will be said in another chap- ter. Holy orders are also referred to, and the observance of celibacy on the part of the clergy is strongly insisted on. 8", God created the world out of nothing, and all that He made was good. Man was created immortal, but after the primal transgression, and because of it, death and corruption are the common lot of all'* However, there will be a resur- Mibid. 8, 14; & 12. uibid. 1, 16, 2, 3. « Ibid. 17. •» Ibid. I, 16, 3. *■ De Giristo et Antichristo, 36. *■ In Gen. 49, ao ; 38, 19. ** Cent. Noet. 17, 18. •• Philosoph. 9, la. Mln i)an. i, 17,5-14. **i|,id. i(\ 33; In Gctt. 38, igt DigiLizedbyGoOglc 153 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES rection of the dead, when each soul shall be reunited to her own body. The bodies of the just shall be changed so as to be a source of happiness to the soul, whereas those of the wicked shall ever remain subject to all the inflnnities of this life. After the resurrection comes the judgment, over which the Incarnate Word of God will preside. All the world, an- gels, men, and demons, will acclaim the judgment to be just. Then every one shall receive the reward of his deeds. Those who have led good lives shall be recompensed with eternal happiness, whilst evilndoers shall be condemned to everlasting punishment. This punishment of the wicked consists in tor- tures of both soul and body. The end of the world is near at hand."" Gathering up what has been said in three of the foregoing chapters — that on the Apostolic Fathers, on the Apologists, and on St. Irenaeus and St Hippolytus — we have a fairly complete view of Christian teaching during the second cen- tury. Nearly every point of doctrine is touched upon, and some of the more fundamental articles of our holy faith are stated with great clearness. Of doctrinal development, how- ever, there occur as yet only a few noticeable traces. They are mostly found in matters connected with ecclesiology, the relation of the Word to the Father, the unity of person and duality of nature in the God-Man, the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Blessed Sacrament, and the sacrificial character of the Eucharistic rite. As a general rule no the- ories are advanced, but the facts of faith are definitely stated. It is these facts that form the foundation of latter theories, which in their turn lead to a fuller exposition of the very same facts, and thereby advance the development of dogmas. ••Adv. Graecos, a; 3; Philosoph. 10, ft 34; ii^ 34; In Proverb. 11, ja DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER IX MONARCHIAN ABERRATIONS AND MONTANISTIC EXCESSES 1 Gnostic Speculations not only stimulated literary activity among orthodox Christians in defense of the faith, but they made so profound and disturbing an impression on certain anxious souls that a reaction set in which led to opposite ex- tremes. The fundamental doctrine of Gnosticism logically implied a division of the Godhead, defending as it did a pleroma of divine beings, all indeed subordinated to the Father-God, yet directly or indirectly emanating from him by some sort of generation, and therefore of necessity sharing his nature, although not by way of identity. It was these inferior divinities that were, according to Gnostic specula- tions, concerned with the visible world, whilst the supreme God stood aloof in majestic isolation. All this was so foreign to Christian consciousness, and appeared so radically opposed to the faith handed down by the Apostles, that many thought it necessary to place exclusive emphasis on the " sole and independent and absolute existence and being and rule of God." This concept of one God and one divine economy, in contradistinction to the Gnostic pleroma and its fatuous rela- tion to the visible world, formed the root idea of a movement of thought usually designated as Monarchianism. The following is a brief outline of its genesis and teaching, to which may be added a few words about the rise and excesses of Montanism. A — Adoptianism and Modalism In its original intent and purpose, therefore, Monarchianism was neither more nor less than an orthodox reaction against »Cfr. Tixeront, H. D. I, aE^-agS; diesn^ The Early Histoiy of the Schwane, H. D. I, 148-161; •Brth- Church, I, 212-237; Bardenhew«r, une-Baker, Op. ctt 96-113; Du- Alticircb. Utt II, 496-555. 153 DigiLizedbyGoOglc 154 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES the unbridled license of Gnostic speculations. But before long it took a different turn and advanced views that were plainly out of harmony with the traditional teaching of the Church. Orthodox Christianity insisted indeed upon the unity of God and upon a strictly divine government of the world, but it insisted also upon the true divinity of the Son and upon His share in the " rule of God." These two beliefs must be recon- ciled, yet so as not to alter the traditions that had come down from the Apostolic past. This Monarchianism failed to do, and hence its final defection from the faith. Thus it was the true divinity of the Son that proved a stumUing-block to the defenders of the Monarchy, although not in the same way to all. At an early date two parties were formed, each one offering its own solution of the problem. The one reduced the divinity of Christ to a mere power be- stowed on Him by God, by the right use of which He acquired divinity in a relative and moral sense ; whilst the other, main- taining that Jesus was truly God, merged His divinity so completely into that of the Father as to deny that the Son was a distinct person. The chief representatives of the former class were Theodotus, Artemon, and Paul of Samosata; of the latter, Praxeas, Noetus, and Sabellius. The former are also known to history as Adoptionists and Dynamic Mon- archians, whilst the latter are called Modalists, Fatripassian- ists, and Sabellians. 1°. Dynamic Monarchianism is usually traced back to Theo- dotus, a currier of Byzantium, who, during the last decade of the second century, came to Rome and was excommunicated by Pope Victor. He seems, however, to have been impelled by the desire to save his own reputation rather than by zeal for the unity of God. Accused of having denied Christ dur- ing the late persecution, he admitted the fact but pleaded as an excuse that thereby he had not denied God, since Christ was only man. When he was called to account for this state- ment, he persisted in his assertion that Jesus was merely human, an ordinary man born of a virgin, to whom the power of God was communicated in a singular manner. This led to his excommunication, and thereupon he founded a sect of DigiLizedbyGoOglc MONARCHIAN HERESIES 155 his own. His immediate followers, however, seem to have taken little interest in religious discussions. They were for the most part literary men, who preferred to busy themselves with the study of ancient authors and the grammatical ex- egesis of Holy Scripture. The best known of them is another Theodotus, called the banker, who placed Melchisedech above Jesus and thus gave rise to the sect of Melchisedechians. Somewhat later a certain Artemon or Artemas, a Syrian by birth, tried to prove these new views by an appeal to Scrip- ture and tradition, but his arguments were thoroughly refuted by the imknown author of the Little Labyrinth, who had no difficulty in showing that Christ had from the very first been regarded and worshiped as true God. After this the sect began to dwindle away, although remnants of it were still found at the time of St Augustine. In Syria, however, it experienced a brief revival shortly after the middle of the third century, through the efforts of Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch and chancellor of Queen Zenobia. He contended that the Logos was indeed homoausios or consubstantial with the Father but only modally distinct, and that He dwelt in Jesus not essentially or personally, but merely as an attribute or quality. Hence in Paul's view the unity of God implies oneness of person as well as of nature; the Word and the Holy Spirit being simply impersonal attributes of the Godhead. He was condemned by three successive provincial synods and finally deposed through the intervention of the Emperor Aurelian, who, though a pagan, decided that the episcopal dignity and jurisdiction ought to be given to a person in com- munion with the Bishop of Rome. 2°. Modalistic Monarchianism started out with a fairer promise of success. For not only did it uphold the unity of God, but also the true divinity of Christ. It did this indeed by removing the real distinction between the persons of the Father and the Son, but this heterodox proceeding was not so apparent to the tinsuspecting faithful. In reference to the divine persons the doctrine was identical with that of Paul of Samosata, but as its defenders insisted that Christ was truly divine, its heretical element was not easily reci^nized. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 156 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES Hence for some time this new heresy escaped even the vigilance of Pope Zephyrinus; but under his successor, CalUstus, its true nature was discovered, and its abettors were promptly excommunicated. Tertullian connects the origin of this sect with a certain . Praxeas, of whom nothing further is known than that he lodged a complaint against the Montanists at Rome, and then passed over into Africa, where he propagated his Modalistic views. He was convicted of heresy by Tertullian and made to sign a retractation. Hippolytus, on the other hand, states that Modalism was first taught by Noetus of Smyrna in Asia Minor, who was excommunicated by the presbyterium of that city. At all events, both were active in spreading the same error, Praxeas in Africa and Noetus in Asia Minor. A somewhat modified form of Modalism was brought to Rome by Epigonus, early in the third century. There it found an ardent propagandist in the person of Cleomenes, and a little later in that of Sabellius. From this latter the heresy received the name of Sabellianism, by which it was known in the East; whilst in the West it was commonly called Patri- passianism, in allusion to the fundamental doctrine advanced by these Modalists. According to them it was the Father Himself, under the name of Son, who became incarnate in Jesus and suffered for the salvation of the world. As strict Monarchists they admitted a trinity of manifestations, but not a trinity of persons. Father, Son and Holy Spirit, they said, are simply designations of three different phases under which the one divine essence reveals itself ; three distinct names of one identical nature and person. Sabellius indeed, when occasion required, would speak of three divine persons, but only in the original sense of the word, signifying a role of acting or mode of manifestation. Patripassianism survived till the fifth century, and played a considerable part in the theological discussions that followed the Council of Nicsea. B — MoNTANiSTic Excesses Montanism was in no sense an Antignostic reaction, but it appears preferable to call attention to it in this place on account DigiLizedbyGoOglc MONTANISTIC ABERRATIONS 157 of the baleful influence it exerted over TertuUian, of whom we must speak in the next chapter. In its beginnings the Montanistic movement did little more than overemphasize the influence which was traditionally attributed to the Holy Spirit, in reference to the special illumination of certain chosen in- dividuals among the faithful. The gift of prophecy played a rather prominent part in the early Church, and authentic instances of this gift reached well up into the second century. Hence when Montanus, a Phrygian convert, began to attract attention by ecstasies and transports in which he uttered strange sayings, it was not at all surprising that he should pass for a prophet. And when two women, Prisca and Maximilla, developed the same symptoms, they were readily accepted as prophetesses. And so the movement was started, probably about 170. In their first message from the Paraclete they announced that the Saviour would speedily return, and that the " Vision of the Heavenly Jerusalem " would soon appear on earth, at a spot which they indicated. The result, of course, was immediate and wide-spread social disorder. Earthly interests were en- tirely set aside, and people devoted themselves exclusively to the practice of asceticism, so as to be prepared for the expected advent of the great day. Thus started, the movement spread rapidly and sowed discord on all sides. At first the authori- ties of the Church adopted a waiting policy, hoping that the excitement would gradually spend itself; but when matters were going from bad to worse, a number of synods were held in Asia Minor, and finally the followers of the new prophet were excommunicated. At the same time several emi- nent writers, among them Apollinaris of Hierapolis and Sera- pion of Antioch, refuted the claims of these pretenders. But neither ecclesiastical censures nor polemical attacks had any appreciable effect towards checking the movement. From Asia the followers of the prophet carried his mes- sage into Gaul, Italy, and Africa, In this latter country their most distinguished convert was TertuUian, a priest of Car- thage, who since his conversion to Christianity, some fifteen years before, had done yeoman's service in the cause of faith. DigiLizedbyGoOgle 158 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES His accq>tance of the Montanists' pretensions meant a break with the Church, but his passionate nature did not shrink from so momentous a step. To his mind the movement did not endanger the faith, but rather confirm it ; and so he threw all other considerations to the winds. Its asceticism especially had great attraction for him, and so had also certain rigoris- tic views regarding marriage and other points of doctrine. The Montanists of Africa chose him as their head, and even called themselves Tertullianists in his honor. However, in the West the movement did not prove very successful, whilst in the East it continued to make considerable stir till the fifth century. After that time it gradually disappeared. As a doctrinal movement MontJinism amounted to very little. Its Millennarian views were, in substance, shared by some orthodox Christians, among them men of eminence, like St Justin and St Irenseus. In asceticism it went somewhat to extremes, but its worst features resulted from doctrinal rigorism, especially touching remarriage and the forgiveness of certain sins. To these must be added its decided opposi- tion to Church authority. It was principally these points that proved the tmdoing of Tertullian. By way of reaction against Montanism another sect sprang up in the latter part of the second century, whose members are knovm as the Alogi. They rejected the Gospel and Apo- calypse of St. John, presumably because in them the doctrine of tfie Holy Ghost holds a prominent place. In consequence they also rejected the Logos doctrine, and on account of this their adversaries, by a play on words, called them Alogi, that is, men without reason. It is usually held that they were the forerunners of Monarchiantsm, but little is known of their history. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER X SOME WESTERN THEOLOGIANS AND THE BEGINNINGS OF LATIN THEOLOGY^ St Irenseus, though belonging to the East t^ birth and training, may nevertheless be said to have laid the foundation of Western theology. Conservative and practical, tenaciously clinging to the traditions of the past and yet solicitously atten- tive to the needs of the present, he exerted in far-away Gaul an influence that was felt in all Western lands, and impressed upon Latin theological thought and tendencies a sane con- servatism which formed its most striking characteristic for many centuries. And yet in the initial efforts of building on this solid foundation, two men were chiefly concerned who both fell away from the Church; but it must be noted that their aberrations were to a great extent the outcome of their personal predispositions. These two men were TertuIIian and Novatian. Both of them were gifted with more than ordi- nary intellectual powers, but unfortunately neither had that self-control, disinterestedness, and well balanced judgment, which are the first requisites in solving practical theological problems. Hence at the critical moment, when they should have set their personal views entirely aside, they were found wanting. With these two may be associated a third writer of the same period, although he was more distinguished for his pas- toral zeal than for his theological ability. This is Cyprian, the saintly bishop of Carthage. He professed to be a disciple of TertuIIian, and in many instances he did little more than give iCfr. D-AUs, La ThMogit de Tertutlien; Ledercq, L'Afrique ... , Cfarttieiuie, I; Bardenhewer, Alt- 3g8-3G6. Idrch. Lit II, 333-394; 39*^*64; 159 DigiLizedbyGoOglc i6o THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES to his master's speculations a practical turn. The works of these men represent in some way the beginning of Latin the- ology, differing from previous productions along theological lines both in language and in thought. Only a brief outline can here be given, but it yiill be si&cient for our purpose A — Tehtullian: His Trinitahiam and Christological Teaching Quintus Septimius Florens TertulHanus was the son of a Roman centurion, resident at Carthage in Africa. In his early years he received a thorough training in I^tin and Gredc literature. Later on he took up the practice of law, and in a short time became a distinguished man. However, like the majority of educated pagans, he was steeped in worldliness and appears to have led a rather licentious life. Struck by the constancy with which Christians endured torture and death for their faith, he began to inquire into the claims of Chris- tianity, and about 196 was received into the Church. A few years later he was admitted to the presbyterium at Carthage, where he gained universal respect as a fervent priest. His greatest failings were his violent temper and a decided leaning towards excessive rigorism. It was on account of'this latter disposition that after some years he felt himself growing out of harmony with the Catholic spirit. Hence when in 207 the Montanists became very active at Carthage, he began to look for a realization of his ascetic ideals in their ranks. Still it was not until 213 that he definitely broke with the Church and became a full-fledged Montanist. He lived to a decrepit old age, but, as far as is known, he never renounced his error. During more than twenty years, from 197 to 220, Tertut- lian was constantly writing against all manner of adversaries, and most of his works have come down to us, though not always in well preserved form. They are of very imequal value, and even the best of them must be read with discrimi- nation. The chief reason is that they are nearly all polemical, and in the heat of combat Tertullian thought more of crushing his adversary than of setting forth the exact truth. According to Hamack, Tertullian was the founder of DigiLizedbyGoOglc TERTULLIAN'S THEOLOGY i6i Western Christianity in its present fonn and the father of orthodox Trinitarian and Christological belief; an assertion, remarks Bardenhewer, that goes far beyond the worst exag- geration of which TertuUian himself, even in his wildest moods, was ever found guilty.' The fact is that TertuUian did little more than clear up hazy concepts and forge a new theological language. He did not add to tiie contents of Chris- tian teaching as it existed before his time, nor did he divert theological thought from its accustomed trend ; but he gathered up many a vague idea thus far imperfectly conceived, pointed out with legal accuracy its true significance, and coined the precise term that would best convey its meaning to others. He did not create a new theology, but a new theological lan- guage. Till his time the only theolc^cal language of the West as well as the East was Greek. Even Hippolytus, though a Roman, employed the Greek language exclusively in the composition of his many works. It may indeed be said tiiat Tertullian's theology diifered also in thought from that of his predecessors, but this difference is in the form only, not in the contents. Thus he was truly a pioneer, the founder of Western theology; but not in the sense claimed by Harnack. He created the outward form of theology as distinct from Christian doctrine, and provided the proper terms for the exact expression of theological thought, but the spirit that gave it life flowed from the fountain of Apostolic preaching. And this he himself insisted on from the moment he took up his pen in defense of the faith until it fell from his palsied hand after his defection from the Church. In one sense it may be said that it was precisely his theological conservatism that finally led him astray. His was too rigid a character to bend to the exigencies of the times, even where it could be done without sacrifice of principle or truth. In all his writ- ings he appeals to the traditions of the past. " No one," he says in the De Prascriptione, " knows the Father except the Son, and he to whom the Son has revealed Him; and to no others did the Son reveal Him except to the Apostles whom He sent out to preach what He had revealed. Now what ■Altktrch. litt 11,34a DigiLizedbyGoOglc i62 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES they preached, that is, what Christ revealed to them, ought to be ascertained from the churches which they founded." ' From the teaching of the mother-churches there is no appeal, even to the Scriptures ; for the Scriptures belong not to here- tics, but to the Church : she is their guardian and interpreter. This is the law of prescription which closes all further appeal. For practical purposes the teaching of the Church is summed up in the Symbol, the Lex Fidei, as the author calls it in his legal phraseology. This Symbol, unlike matters that are merely of discipline and custom, cannot be touched; a view evidently borrowed from Irenaeus. Even as a Montanist he clung to this principle. Only what lies outside the Symbol and at the same time is not clearly contained in the teaching of the Church, may be made a matter of investigation.* The Symbol of the African Church has been received from the mother-church at Rome; the latter, therefore, is the foun- tain of truth." In all this there is evidently no attempt to strike out into new directions ; the author closely follows the lines traced out by Irenseus, Justin, and the Fathers of the sub- Apostolic age. With this ascertained, we may now examine a few points of doctrine, in which we shall indeed find new modes of presentation, but nothing new by way of contents. 1°. God is strictly one, yet in such wise that in the one God there are three divine persons. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who are distinct in their personality but identical in substance.' This oneness of the Godhead admits of a certain oikonomia, a distribution of the unity into the Trinity, which does not destroy but organize the Monarchy.' The result of this dis- tribution of the unity of the Godhead is the trinity of persons, through a communication of the same nature, the same sub- stance, and the same power to each. " The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Spirit is God, each of the three is God." ' Though one, they are three ; they are not " unus " •op, rit. ai; cfr. 19. •Adv. Praaca; 4; & * De PrawcripL 13; 14; De Vir- * Ibid. 2. gin. VeJand. i. "Ibid. 13. •D« Fraescript 21. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TERTULLIAN'S THEOLOGY 163 but " unum," not one person but one nature ; " tres pcrsonse, una substantia," three persons, one substance ; " trinitas unius divinitatis. Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus," a trinity of one divinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Ghost.' These expressions, " one substance, one state, three persons, a trinity of one divinity," are new theological terms; they are coined by one who has apparently a clear concept of what he believes and a thorough grasp on the genius of the language he uses ; but there is absolutely nothing new in the ideas which they convey. The first three, it is sometimes contended, were borrowed from the legal language of the day and made to (it floating concepts of the faith; but if so, they acquired in tliis transference from one sphere of thought to another a new significance. They did not determine the author's thought, but the author's thought determined their meaning in the new usage which he thus inaugurated. And in this new usage he enshrined the faith as preached by the Apostles. For, after all his dexterous efiforts to set forth in apt de6nition the teaching of the Church on the Trinity, after all the various turns of speech he employs to mark plurality of persons and identity of substance or nature, he falls back for the doctrine itself upon the words of the Saviour recorded in St. John, " Ego et Pater unum sumus." This contains the sum and substance, the very essence of his teaching. " Non unus sed unum," not identity of person but identity of nature. The new theological termi- nology which he thus originated became a precious heirloom for subsequent ages, but only in so far as it enshrined the more precious heritage of Apostolic preaching. It must, however, be observed that whilst the author's termi- nology is almost Nicene in its exactness, and whilst in his mere statement of the Trinitarian doctrine he rivals the great Fathers of the fourth century, he is far from being satisfac- tory when he enters upon detailed explanations of his views. Even if Hamack's inference that Tertullian was in reality a Tritheist ^^ goes somewhat beyond the premises, neverthe- less there is found in his writings a large number of texts •Ibid aa; De Padic. 21. ^o DoKincnK«(^Klite, I, 575 ««■ DigiLizedbyGoOglc 1 64 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES that seem to point in this direction. Thus when he states that the three divine persons do not differ in nature, in sub- stance, in power, he adds that they do differ " gradu, forma, specie," and although the exact meaning of these terms is not quite clear, not a few writers are inchned to see in them more than a merely personal distinction.*^ Again, speaking of the Father and the Son, he says : " The Father is the whole sub- stance, but the Son is a derivation of the whole and a portion, as He Himself acknowledges when he states, ' The Father is greater than I.' " " Hence the Father is invisible " pro pleni- tudine majestatis," whilst tlie Son is visible " pro modulo derivationis," and "pro temperatura portionis." ^* Similarly the Holy Spirit, who comes from the Father through the Son, " a Patre per Filium," is, as the " vicaria vis " of the Son, in a like subordinate position to the Father, although He is the same God with the Father and the Son.** To some extent, no doubt, these and similar Subordinationist expressions may be accounted for by the author's anxiety to refute at all costs the views of Praxeas, who rejected the tra- ditional teaching concerning the personal distinctions in the Godhead. Hence this distinction is very much emphasized, and then to preserve in spite of it the oneness of God, the Son and the Holy Spirit are conceived as in some way sub- ordinate to the Father. There is obviously a flaw in this reasoning, at least as it is proposed by the author; but not to the extent, as Hamack maintains, that the unity of the divine substance is conceived as merely specific or generic. In the author's mind it is numerical and absolute ; for he emphasizes again and again that the distinction of persons arises from a distribution of the unity, not from a separation and division ; ^'^ ■> The whole passage is as fol- unius status et uniua potestatis, quia lows: "Sic quoque unus sit omnia unus Deus, ex quo et gradus uti dum ex uno omnia, per substantive et fomue et species in nomine scilicet unitatem; et nihilominus Fatris et Ftlii et Spiritus Sancti custodiatur oeconomix sacrament- deputantur." Adv. Pnix. z. um, quae unttatem in trinitatem dis- " Ibid. 9. gonit, tres dirt^ns, Patrem et "Ibid. 14. Filium et Spiritum Sanctum. Tres "Ibid. 4, 8; 2; De Praescr^t autem non statu sed gradu, nee sub' 13. stantia sed forma, nee potestate sed >-* Adv. Prax. 3, 3, 8. specie; unius autem substantix et DigiLizedbyGoOglc TERTULLIAN'S THEOLOGY 165 also that Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are " a trinity of one divinity," that " the Son and the Spirit are of the substance of the Father," and that the Son is God only in so far as He is " ex imitate Patris." " The truth seems to be that Tertul- lian, in common with other writers of this period, Irenxus, Hippolytus, Novation, Qement of Alexandria, and Origen, made use of explanations and expressions savoring of Sub- ordinationism simply to defend the distinction of the divine persons against Modalism, but in his usual passionate way he allowed himself to be carried somewhat beyond the limits of strictly orthodox teaching. 2*. The author's way of speaking is also unsatisfactory in reference to the generation of the Son, He admits indeed the eternal existence of the Word, even as a distinct hypostasis,*' and also that the Word thus existing from all eternity is prop- erly called Son,*^ but this notwithstanding he contends that there was a time when the Son was not," and that the Word was uttered by the Father in view and at the time of creation, by which utterance His generation became perfect."* Hence besides the eternal generation of the Son in the bosom of the Father, which seems to be put more or less on a par with conception, the author admits a kind of temporal generation in which the Word is brought forth as perfect Son, In this matter he likely enough formed his views on the writings of the Apolf^sts, who had used similar terms. ^* 3°. In reference to the God-Man it is specially deserving of notice that the author strikes the exact terms in bringing out the unity of person and the duality of natures, thus neatly formulating the doctrine which the Council of Chalcedon de- fined in almost identical words two centuries later. Com- menting on the opening . verse of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, where it is said that Christ is the seed of David according to the flesh and declared God according to the Spirit, he writes : " He therefore is God, the Word and Son of "De Pudic. 21; Adv. Pnoc a; " Adv. Hermog. 3. 19. » Adv. Prax. 7. " nrid. s- " Cfr. D'AWs, La Thiologie de " Ibid. 7. Tcrtullien, 81-102. DigiLizedbyGoOglc i66 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES God. We see a twofold state, not confused, but united in one person, God and the man Jesus."" And not only, he says in another place, are there two distinct natures in one and the same Christ, but also two modes of action ; for the properties of the two natures remain truly distinct.'* This might very well serve as a definition against the seventh-cen- tury Monothelites. For the rest his Christology is practically the same as that of Irenseus, only that he holds the singular view of Christ's Blessed Mother having lost her virginity in His birth." To this assertion, however, he was most likely driven by his anxiety to defend the reality of Christ's human nature against the Docetae and Valentinians. 4°. In his soteriology he brings out the vicarious character of Christ's redemptive work, although his views are rather undeveloped as regards details. The Son of God became in- carnate that He might expiate our sins, and thus the innocent Christ was substituted for us sinners; without this our ruin could not have been repaired."' Jesus was the new Adam in whom the souls of us all were contained."" It was for our redemption that the Word took our body and our soul ex Maria, and subjected Himself to all our weaknesses and in- firmities, sin alone excepted." Thus the Incarnation is the world's only hope. 5°. After the redemption is thus accomplished, our salva- tion is in our own hands. It was through an abuse of free wilt that sin and all its terrible consequences entered the world,"" and now that sin has been blotted out by the blood of the Saviour, it is by a good use of our free will that we must attain salvation. To this we are strictly obliged, because we are the debtors of God; our eternal happiness must come to us as a reward of our merits," This view of satisfaction and personal merit reveals Tertullian's legal bent of mind, yet, if rightly understood, it expresses the objective truth with great "Adv. Prax. vj. »»De Came Christ!, 16, 14; 10, "De Carne Giritti, 5. 14; 5-9. M Tkij — w Adv. Marcion, II. 5, 6, 7; I, 22. »• De Poenit. 2; 6; De Orat 3, 4; De ExhorL Cast. 2. DigiLizedbyGoOglc TERTULLIAN'S THEOLOGY 167 exactness, and hence it survives in our modern text-books of Dogmatic Theolc^. It is, however, only a new formulation of a doctrine as old as Christianity. 6°. On the Church the author offers nothing new, although, even after he had become a Montanist, he bore witness to the fact, sarcastically it is true, that the mother-churches, of which he had made so much in his earlier days, were regarded as in some way depending on the jurisdiction of Rome. His sarcastic use of the terms Pontifex Maximus, Episcopus episcoporum, must have rested upon a more solid foundation than Uie mere pretension of Callistus to the powers indicated by these titles. •j". In his teaching on the sacraments there are some points that deserve special notice. Baptism, in which the recipient is reborn in water as the divine tchtus, is ordinarily necessary for salvation, but it may be replaced by martyrdom."* It can be conferred only once, and if administered by heretics it is invalid.'^ Children are baptized according to the custom of the Church, but it were better to wait until they can be instructed." The bishop is the ordinary minister, but with his consent priests and deacons can also baptize; and so can lay persons, provided they are not women.*" Baptism is sol- emnly administered at Easter and Pentecost, still it is valid if conferred at other times." Confirmation is administered immediatdy after baptism. The laying on of hands is preceded by an unction, but it is not altogether clear whether this is regarded as an essential part of the sacramental rite.'" The Eucharist is the body and blood of the Lord, where- with the flesh is nourished that the soul may fatten on its God. It is the banquet prepared for the returning prodigal, the food which Christ Himself places before us." Those who receive it are very careful that nothing of the con^crated bread and wine fall to the ground.'' It is distributed by those "De Bapt i; 12, 13; 16. "Cfr. CDwyer, Confirmation, *' Ibid. 15, 22, 54 sag. •» Ibid. IS ; 18. " De Resurr. Cam. 8; De Pudic •• Ibid. 17. 9. ** Ibid. 19. "De Corona, 3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 1 68 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES who preside over the assembled faithful ; it is also preserved to be taken on fast days." Finally it is offered as a sacrifice, both for the souls departed and on the anniversary of mar- tyrs." All this obviously implies belief in the Real Presence, and hence in another place the author goes so far as to say that those who touch the Eucharist with hands that have made idols torture the Lord's body.*" On the question of penance Tertullian was not always con- sistent, yet he never denied that the power of the keys had been given to the Church. Even after he had become a Mon- tanist, he only tried to limit its application, and that merely as a matter of prudence and expediency. Of this, however, more will be said in another chapter. Holy orders the author speaks of in passing. The hier- archy is made up of bishops, priests, and deacons, who per- form liturgical functions and instruct the faithful.*^ In sev- eral places he seems to hold that the distinction between the clergy and laity is simply the result of ecclesiastical I^sla- tion." Marriages must be contracted before the Church; entered upon in any other way, they are considered as adulterous unions.*' After his defection from the faith, the author be- came quite rabid on the subject of marriage, demanding that all second marriages be absolutely forbidden.** The only sacrament not mentioned in the writings of Ter- tullian is that of extreme unction, although it is possible that he refers even to this when he speaks of the donum curationum, the gift of healing. Of course, he had no formal sacramental theory, still there is found in hts writings a symbolism that may be said to contain the elements from which such a theory was later on developed. It is the visible sign through which the invisible grace of God is communicated. Thus " the flesh is washed, that the soul may be cleansed ; the flesh is anointed, "De Oral. ig. «De Exhort. Cast. ?; De Pudic. »• Ibid. ; De Corona, 3. 21, « De Idol. 7. *» Ibid. 4. "D« Bapt 17; De Monog. 11. **Ad Uxor, i, i; De Monog. i, 2, 14. DigiLizedbyGoOglc THE TEACHING OF NOVATIAN 169 that die soul may be consecrated; the flesh is signed, that the soul may be fortified; the flesh is overshadowed t^ the imposition of hands, that the soul may be illumined; the flesh fewis on the body and blood of Christ, that the soul may grow fat on its God." *" 8^. The author's teaching on eschatological subjects is quite archaic and need not be specially noticed here. A word, how- ever, must be said on his views in reference to the fall of man and its consequences. Adam's fall, he says, brought upon all mankind not only death, but sin and punishment as well. There is a solidarity in this transgression, and it introduced into every soul a stain, an original blemish, a bent to evil.** This seems to contain, in its elements at least, the doctrine of original sin. B — NovATiAN : His Treatise on the TwNrnr Novatian was a disciple and imitator of TertuUian. He was also the first Roman writer who composed his works in the Latin tongue. Up to the middle of the third century he was a priest of good standing, besides being generally esteemed as an eminent rhetorician and philosopher. After the death of Pope Fabian, which occurred January 20, 250, he wrote, in the name of the Roman clergy, several letters to Cyprian of Carthage, dealing with the reconciliation of the lapsi. The doctrine contained in them is in perfect harmony with the traditional teaching of the Churdi. But shortly after this, he became an extreme rigorist and started a schism in opposi- tion to Pope Cornelius. His views were adopted by many others, and at the time of the Council of Nicaea the sect was still in existence. He seems to have been a prolific writer, but of his many works only four have come down to us. These are entitled, De Cibis Judaxcts, De Spectaculis, De Bono Pudi- citia, De Trinitate. Only the last one is of real doctrinal value. The following is a brief summary of its contents : In dose adherence to the order followed by TertuUian and ** De Resurrect Cam. & DigiLizedbyGoOglc I70 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES St. Irenasus, the author treats first of the omnipotent Father, who so far transcends the world of finite things that He is beyond all thought; then he dwells at greater length on the nature of the Son, His real or personal distinction from the Father, His true divinity, and the reality of His human nature; finally he devotes one chapter to the doctrine of the Holy Ghost. In purpose and execution the whole is an orderly ex- position of the Rule of Faith. In his teaching on the Father he offers nothing special; but when speaking of the Son he emphasizes the fact that the Word is eternal not merely as Word, but also as Son. His generation is strictly from all eternity, and therefore also His divine sonship; and this necessarily so, for else the Father would not be Father.*' However, even with this as a suf- ficient reason for the divine sonship, there is a sort of second generation when the Word was uttered by the Father in view of the creative work,** And thus the author seems to fall back into the course of reasoning initiated by the Apologists. Between the Father and the Son there is a communio sub- stantia, a common possession of the same substance, so that the Son is substantia divina, truly divine,*' The Father is indeed anterior to the Son, but only in as much as He is Father; and so the Son is posterior to the Father, but only in as much as He is Son. In substance and being they are coetemal.*" The Son is, however, a second person, and as such distinct from the Father. Nay, He is not only distinct, but in some way inferior ; for He is neither invisible nor incom- prehensible as is the Father."' Here we have the logical in- consistency again that occurs in nearly all these writers. Its probable explanation was given above. The Holy Ghost is never called God by the author; yet He is represented as one of the Trinity, possessed of the attri- butes of the Godhead. He is the illuminator of things divine, a heavenly power, existing from all eternity, and still in «De Trin. 31. «De Trin. 24. *• Ibid. ■• Ibid. 31, a?, 61. "Ibid. 11-24; 31. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CYPRIAN'S ECCLESIOLOGY 171 some way inferior to the Son." It is from the Son that He receives what He gives to creatures.''' In his Christology the author strongly emphasizes the unity of person in the Saviour, but without sacrificing the distinc- tion of the two natures, Christ is at the same time true God and true man, bom of a virgin, and having a nature like ours.** Even as man Jesus is the Son of God, not in virtue of a divine generation, or naturally, but in consequence of the personal union of His human nature with the Word. The author treats as heretics all those who deny either the reality of Christ's humanity or the truth of His divinity." Many other points of doctrine are touched upon, such as the creation of the world, man's likeness to God, his freedom, the immortality of his soul, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Church and in the hearts of the faithful, but as all this is referred to only in passing it need not detain us here. C — St. Cyprian: His Teaching on the Church Cyprian was born in Africa, about the year 200, of wealthy pagan parents. Early in life he embraced the career of a rhetorician and won great renown in the schools of Carthage. When about forty-six years old, he was converted to Chris- tianity and shortly after was elevated to the priesthood. To- wards the end of the year 248, or early in 249, he was made bishop of Carthage and metropolitan of Proconsular Africa. He was not an eminent theologian but a model bishop, having a practical rather than a speculative mind. During the ter< ribie persecution of Decius (250-251), he concealed himself in order not to deprive his flock of their pastor ; but seven years later, when the persecution of Valerius broke out, he remained at his post in spite of all entreaties. In a short while he was arrested and after a brief trial, the Acts of which are still extant, he was beheaded for the faith, September i, 258. In theology St. Cyprian was a close follower of Tertullian, whom he was fond of calling his master ; but he had none of DigiLizedbyGoOglc 1/2 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES his master's iidpetuosity and passionate violence. Of him St Jerome writes : " It would be superfluous to raise a monu- ment to his genius, as his works are more brilliant than the sun." Soon after bis death, Cyprian's writings were collected by Pontius, his deacon and intimate friend. They comprise sermons, pamphlets, tractates, and letteis. In these he touches upon almost every point of doctrine and moral practice, but as far as the History of Dogmas is concerned, only his views on Church government and his contribution to Sacramental Theology are of real importance. The Church, as conceivedby St Cyprian, is constituted after the fashion of a municipal commonwealth, having its plebs, made up of the ordinary faithful, and its ordo or dents, con- sisting of those who are entrusted with governmental powers. ■*• The constitution of the ordo is hierarchial. At the head, in each particular commiuiity, stands the bishop, who holds the " sacerdotii sublime fastigium." His authority descends in ever diminishing degrees to priests, deacons, and subdeacons. There are also other persons entrusted with various ecclesi- astical functions, as acolytes, exorcists, and lectors."' Of ostiarii or porters, who at that time held a clerical rank in the church of Rome, no mention is made. Thus the Church is a closely knit and sharply defined unit, of which the clergy and the laity are the constituent parts." The chief bond of union in this collective body is the gov- erning authority derived from Christ. When the consecrating prelates lay their hands on the head of the new bishop, to "confer upon him the episcopate," he is made to share in the Saviour's own authority over the faithful entrusted to his care. In virtue of this consecration he can claim as applied to himself the words spoken to the Apostles : " He that heareth you, heareth me." "* The Apostles were the bishops of old, and the present bishops are the Apostles of to-day. However, the bishops must not use their power tyrannically ; they must feed their flock on the heavenly nourishment laid up in the Church. For the Church is the spouse of Christ, ''Eg. 66, 4,6: 3,3- DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CYPRIAN'S ECCLESIOLOGY 173 to whom she must bring forth spiritual chndrca*" Thus there is also provided an internal bond of union, faith and charity, which is made strong l^ the external bond of authority. Hence the most fundamental note of the Church is unity : internal unity through practical faith and active charity, and external unity of due subjection to lawful pastors. And this unity was intended by Christ Himself. It is typiiied by His seamless robe, and called to the minds of all by tiie Eucharistic bread and wine, which, though derived from many grains of wheat and many grapes, are nevertheless but one heavenly nourishment.'* To this unity the growth of the Church and her consequent dispersion through many lands offers no ob- stacle. For from one sun dart forth many rays, from one spring flow many rivulets, from one tree spread out many branches ; yet in each instance unity is preserved by the oneness of the source," So, as there is one God, one founder of the Church, and one source of authority, the Church ever remains one in spite of her diffusion throughout the world. The proximate reason why this universal Church is firmly fixed in its unity is the solidarity of the episcopate."' Just as the Apostles formed only one Apostolic college, and only one Apostolic power was shared by all in solidum, so all the bishops together form only one episcopate, each one sharing in the powers given to it as a body."* Hence if an individuS bishop is neglectful of his duty, the others must come to the rescue of his flock.'" And to emphasize this corporate union and unity, Christ built His Church on one alone, on Peter; for although after the resurrection He gave equal powers to all His Apostles . . . nevertheless, in order to make manifest the unity, He so disposed matters by His own authority that the origin of this same unity should flow from one." Heresies and schisms may and do arise, but they do not affect the unity of the Church. The well-disposed do not separate them- •• De Unit 4-6 ; Ep. 33, r. •• Ibid. 3. "DeUnit?; Ep. 63, 13; S9. 5- "Ep. 68, 3. "De Unit 5. "De Unit 4. ••Ibid4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 174 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES selves from her communion. The wind does not blow away the wheat, nor does it tear up the tree that has its roots struck deep in the ground; it is liie chaff that is blown about by every passing breeze, and trees without roots that are thrown down by the storm.*^ And as there is thus unity in the Church of Christ, so is that Church also one. To her is applicable the Lord's saying, " He that is not with me is against me, and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad." Witfiout the Church there is no salvation.®^ He cannot have God as his Father, who does not have the Church as his mother .■• The Holy Ghost, the Sanctifier, was given to the Church and in her alone are treasured up the means of salvation. Outside the Church there is no baptism, no priesthood, no altar. She is the Ark outside of which there is no safety from the flood, the sealed spring from which outsiders cannot draw.^" For the better government of the Church, and to meet special difficulties that may arise, it is expedient that coun- cils be held from time to time, which bishops from the same re- gion attend and at which they act as one body. The decrees passed in these councils have a binding force and must be ob- served even by the bishops.''* In the matter of convening pro- vincial synods periodically, St. Cyprian simply enforced a well established custom of the African Church, which dated at least from the beginning of the third century. Over these synods he himself presided, and although according to his theory all bishops shared one divinely constituted authority in solidum, nevertheless in practice he seems to have claimed a real pri- macy over the whole of Proconsular Africa, What, then, about the Primacy over the whole Church? Not only is unity the fundamental note of each individual church, or of a collection of churches belonging to the same region, hut of the universal Church, the Church Catholic, as well. That Church had never yet gathered in council, and although there was kept up a constant correspondence between •^De Unit, g; eft. 3; 5; 6. "Cfr. De Unit 10; 11; 12; 13. •■ Ep. 73, 21. Ti Ep. 64, I. •■Ep. 74, 7; Dt Unit 6. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CYPRIAN'S ECCLESIOLOGY 175 the particular churches of her communion, yet the episcopate as a whole had no opportunity to act as one body. Was there a head somewhere ? Some cme bishop endowed with authority to speak for all and to make his decision binding upon their consciences? Did Cyprian admit such a primacy? Certain it is that Cyprian regarded the constitution of the universal Church as monarchical. The Church Catholic was to his mind not merely a gathering of coordinated local churches. He taught quite clearly that Christ built His Church on Peter; that Peter was at once her foundation and head. And Peter, he admitted, continued to live in the Bishop of Rome ; hence in so far at least he acknowledged the Bishop of Rome as the Head of the Church. The " cathedra Petri " was to him the fountain and source of all ecclesiastical life: " Ecclesije Catholicae matrix et radix." '" Hence, whilst speaking of the schism of Felidssimus, he told his own flock: " God is one and Christ is one, and there is one Churdi and one cathedra founded by the voice of the Lord upon Peter." " And writing to a bishop who showed himself inclined to follow the anti-Pope Novatian, he argued : " Cornelius was madebishopby the judgment of God and of Christ . . . when the place of Fabian, that is, the place of Peter, and the dignity of the sacerdotal cathedra was vacant." Again, of those schismatics who sought protection in Rome, he wrote : " They dare even set sail for tiie cathedra of Peter and the ecclesia principalis, whence sacerdotal imity took its rise, carrying with them letters from schismatics and impious persons, oblivious of the fact that the Romans are they whose faith was praised by the Apostle, and to whom perfidy cannot have access." '* The Roman Primacy is brought out still more clearly in Cyprian's treatise De Catholicce Ecclesia Unitate. In chapter 4 occurs the passage: "The Lord saith to Peter: 'I say to thee, thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church I' (To the same He &aith after His resurrection: ' Feed my sheep! ' Upon him He builds His Church, and to "Ep. 48, 3- "E*.SS.8;S9,i4- " Ej). 43. 5. DigiLizedbyGoOgle 176 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES him He commends the feeding of His sheep), and although after His resurrection He confers a similar power upon all the Apostles and says : ' As the Father bath sent me, I also send you. Receive the Holy Spirit; if you forgive any one's sins, they shall be forgiven him; if you retain any one's sins, they shall be retained,' nevertheless in order to show forth the unity (He established one cathedra), and by His own authority He disposed matters in such a way, that the begin- ning (and reason) of unity should proceed from one. Tnat indeed were all the Apostles what Peter was, associated with him in a similar honor and power, but the inception of both proceeds from the unity (and the Primacy is given to Peter), in order to point out that the Church of Christ is one (and that the cathedra is one). (All indeed are pastors, but the flock is shown to be one, and this must be fed by the Apostles in perfect agreement of mind. Whoso does not hold tiiis unity, does he believe he has faith? Whoso deserts the cathedra of Peter, upon whom the Church is founded, does he trust that he is in the Church?)"To If this text be taken as it stands, including the passages enclosed in parentheses, it undoubtedly asserts the Primacy, both as given to Peter and as continuing in his successors. But until a few years ago, the text was quite commonly re- garded as interpolated; and most non-Catholic critics main- tain this even now. The reason advanced for asserting that the text was tampered with by a later hand, is the fact that there are three series of manuscripts, in each one of which the text has a different reading. One contains the reading cited above; another leaves out the passages enclosed in parentheses; whilst the third is a combination of the other two. As there appeared no compelling reason why the second series of manu- scripts should omit passages contained in the first, it was quite generally assumed* outside of Catholic circles that the first had been interpolated by some one who was desirous of making St Cyprian defend the Primacy of Rome. Thus the matter stood until a few years ago, when Dom T« De Unit 4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CYPRIAN'S ECCLESIOLOGY 177 Chapman undertook to trace up the history of the different manuscripts. The results of his long and detailed studies have been given to the learned world as follows: Both the first and die second series are undoubtedly genuine. They are faithful copies of the work of St Cyprian. The difference of the reading is accounted for in this way. The first series is derived from a copy which Cjrprian sent to Rome during the Novatian schism. In order to strike at the root of the schism, he inserted the passages referring to the Primacy of Peter and to the consequent authoritative position of the Roman Bishop. The second series originated from a copy directed against Felicissimus, who was then disturbing the peace of the church at Carthage. In this, as is obvious, there would be no need of appealing to Peter's Primacy nor to the authority of Rome." Batiffol, Hamack, and many other scholars admit Dom Chapman's contention that the text of the manuscript in ques- tion is undoubtedly authentic, although they do not subscribe to all his arguments leading up to this conclusion. The charge of interpolation, they say, must forever be abandoned. In whatever way the difference of reading in the two series of manuscripts may finally be explained, certain it is that both hand down the genuine doctrine of St. Cyprian.'^ As this is the only point of real importance, the long continued con- troversy may be considered to have been set at rest. In con- sequence, the Anglican contention, that Cyprian's views on the constitution of the Church support the Episcopalian posi- tion, becomes doubly untenable. If in the heat of conflict, during the baptismal controversy, Cyprian apparently failed to see the full bearing of his previous teaching on Church gov- ernment, that only shows how short-sighted and inconsistent human reason may become when obscurod by passion. It does not mean a repudiation of his teaching as proposed in times of peace. In reference to the connection between the Church and the sacraments, St Cyprian adopted the view of TertuUian, hold- *• Revne Bendictiii^ \ (igea), V, » (1903). DigiLizedbyGoOglc 178 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES ing that these visible means of sanctification are of no avail outside her communion. Hence heretics cannot confer the sacraments validly. This view was emphatically rejected by Rome, with the result that a rather animated controversy was carried on between Cyprian and Pope Stephen, of which a short account will be given below. Of Cyprian's teaching c«i the sacraments the following points may be noted : i". Baptism, which is a second and spiritual birth, not only may but must be administered to children. There is no need of deferring it till the eighth day after birth, as is contended by some because of the law governing circumcision among the Jews. Whenever conferred, baptism produces grace in the souls of children as well as in those of adults ; and this all the more readily because these little ones have no personal sins, but only the "borrowed" sin of Adam.'" Baptism of water may be replaced by martyrdom, which is a baptism of blood ; this confers even a greater grace and exerts a higher power.'* 2°. Confirmation is administered by the laying on of hands, anointing the forehead with chrism, and the recital of a prayer. Through this rite the Holy Ghost is given to the newly bap- tized.*" 3°. The Holy Eucharist is also received immediately after baptism, and thenceforth more or less frequently according to the devotion of the faithful.*^ Its worthy reception presup- poses freedom from grievous sins ; for it is the " holy body of the Lord." Those who venture to approach the sacred table without having done proper penance for their sins, profane the Saviour's body and blood.*" This teaching evidently im- plies belief in the Real Presence. Furthermore, the Eucharist is a true sacrifice, which was first offered by Christ, and now by priests in His stead.** It is identical with the sacrifice of the cross, and through it the Redeemer's sufferings are pre- T» Ad Donat. 4; Ep. 64, 2, 5. *iEp. 7O1 2. '»Ep. 73, 22; Ad Fortunat Praef. •*£{>. 15, i; 63, 4; De Laps. 25. + „„ MEp. 63,4. 14. ■"Ep. 73, 9; 70,3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CYPRIAN'S ECCLESIOLOGY 179 sented to God. It is efficacious for th« living; and the dead, and is also offered up for penitent sinners.^ 4'. Penance blots out sins ccanmitted after baptism. For minor faults private penance, such as alms-giving, is sufficient ; but if grievous sins have been committed, especially sins of adultery, apostasy, and homicide, recourse must be had to the bishop.** He takes cognizance of these sins, imposes a pro- portionate penance, and when that has been duly performed reconciles the penitent to the Church.*' Even secret sins, such as sins of thought, when they are of a grievous nature, must be confessed; but no sins are so grave that they cannot be forgiven by the Church. In some cases, however, reconcilia- tion is deferred till the hour of death.'^ 5°. Holy orders are conferred by the bishop assisted by the preabyterium.** When a new bishop is to be consecrated, all the neighboring bishops of the same province come together and take part in the ceremony.** Simple priests offer up the Holy Sacrifice where the bishop does not celebrate ; they may also be delegated to reconcile penitents. It is the office of deacons to assist in the sacred liturgy, and to supervise the distributic«i of alms among the poor." 6°. On matrimony the author has nothing special, except that he insists strongly on the indissolubility of Qiristian mar- riage and forbids all matrimonial alliances of the faithful witii pagans.'^ With these three authors as its first representatives, Latin theology made a fair start Tertullian and Novatian con- tributed very extensively to the clearing up of orthodox Trini- tarian and Christological teaching, whilst Cyprian's writings on the Church will ever be a source of valuable information. It was not until a century later that the work thus begun received any noticeable development, but the lines of that development are already clearly traced in the works of these three writers. •*Ep. 63, 17; r. a; 16, 3; I?, 3. ME^. 38, a. •» De Opere et Eleem. 11 ; 14; De »• ^ 6?, S- Bono Patient 14 ; De Laps, 16; *• Ep. a 3 ; 56, 3 ; 18, i ; S?, 6. •«De Laps. 16. "Testiia 3, 6a, 90; De Laps. 6. "Ibid. 38; 39. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER XI THE BAPTISMAL CONTROVERSY: PENANCE IN THE EARLY CHURCH In the preceding chapter we have confined our remarks to the doctrinal statements of the writers whose works called for a brief review, thus leaving aside all discussion of the various controversies that were going on during the first half of the third century. This was done for clearness' sake, so as to keep the common teaching unobscured by the diver- gency of private views. However, a few words must be said about two points that caused considerable stir in Catholic cir- cles, the one giving rise to the baptismal controversy and the other to the question of penance. A — The Baptismal Controversy ^ Although the reception of converts into the Church was al- ways considered to belong officially to the bishop, since he was placed by the Holy Ghost as shepherd over Ae flock of Christ, still, under given conditions, priests and deacons and even lay persons might receive them by duly administering the sacrament of baptism. In all these cases, however, the ordinary supposition was that persons thus conferring the sacrament were in communion with the Church. But what if they belonged to an heretical sect? Would the sacrament ip that case be valid? Or would it be necessary to treat these converts as if they had not been baptized at all? The same, of course, would also apply to confirmation administered by an heretical bishop. Till the middle of the second century there was no occasion for inquiring into this matter, as there were practically no 1 Cfr. Tixeront, H. D. I, 366-376; Duchesne, The Earlr History ot die Charcb, I, 303-312. DigiLizedbyGoOglc THE BAPTISMAL CONTROVERSY i8i heretical sects which had organized communities of their own; but a httle later, when Marcion and the followers of Montanus established separate churches, the question became very prac- tical. At first the course of action adopted does not appear to have been uniform; some bishops baptizing these converts and others simply imposing their lunds by way of reconcilia- tion. It was during Cyprian's time that the matter came up for general discussion, and the result was the baptismal om- troversy. Taking it as an incontestable principle that the Church alone is commissioned to forgive sins and to impart the Holy Ghost, and overlooking entirely the distinction between a valid and a fruitful reception of the sacraments, Cyprian taught unhesi- tatingly that baptism administered by heretics was invalid. In this he was, moreover, supported by the authority of Ter- tullian and a well established custom of rebaptizing converts from heresy, not only in Africa, but also at Antioch, Qesarea, and other places. He had against him the custom followed at Rome, Alexandria, Csesarea in Palestine, and most places of Western Europe; but above all the weighty authcaity of Pope Stephea When he explained his position to the Pope, in order to solicit his approval, the latter not only refused to sanction the African custom, but sent a peremptory order to discontinue it in future. " Si qui ergo a quacumque heresi venient ad vos, nihil innovetur nisi quod traditum est, ut manus illis imponatur in poenitentiam." " " If therefore any come to you, no matter from what heretical sect, let nothing be renewed except what has been established by tradition (here at Rome), (namely) that hands be imposed on them by way of penance." Fir- milian of Caesarea, corresponding with Cyprian on this matter, states that " Stephen and those who are of the same mind with him contend that in the baptism of heretics sins are forgiven ; because it matters little who confers baptism, since grace is obtained through the invocation of the Blessed Trinity, the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit Nay, as the *Ep. 74, ad Firniiliaiium ; cfr. Ep. 75, ad Cyprianum. JigiLizedbyGoOglc 1 82 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES successor of Peter, upon whom the foundations of the Church have been laid, he says even that through the sacrament of baptism thus conferred all the stains of the old man are washed away, deadly sins are forgiven, the right of divine sonship is acquired, and a fit preparation is made for life eternal."* Surely the " successor of Peter " had a very thorough under- standit^ of the efUcacy of baptism. If in the matter of Papal authority Cyprian's practice had corresponded with his theory, as explained in the preceding chapter, this decision of the Pope should have ended the dis- cussion. But in the heat of the combat he seems to have for- gotten completely what he had so strongly and clearly set forth in times of peace. And so the discussion waxed furious as time passed on. Backed up by the councils over which he presided at Carthage, and also by the letters he received from Firmilian of Cxsarea in Cappadocia, Cyprian became abusive in his correspondence with the Pc^. But all to no purpose, Stei^en stood firm; nor did Cyprian think of yield- ing. Finally matters were brought to a settlement by the death of the contestants; both laid down their life for the faith. However, even before Cyprian was called to martyr- dom, peace was estaMished between him and the successor of Stephen, Xystus II, and shortly after this the Roman cus- tom prevailed in Africa. A conciliar decision was given at Aries in 314. Whether Cyprian's insubordination, precisely as viewed by himself, touched merely a matter of discipline, or had at least an indirect bearing on faith, it is not so easy to decide. Many Cathdics take the former view, exculpating the bishop of Carthage altogether, on the plea that in matters of discipline well established local customs have the force of law, with which it would be imprudent for the Church to interfere. However, this explanation does not seem to be in harmony with the facts of Uie case. Failing to distinguish between the validity and ihc efficacy of the sacraments, Cyprian necessarily inferred the invalidity of heretical baptism from his view on the position of the Church in the economy of salvation. Hence It ad Cyprianum. DigiLizedbyGoOglc PENANCE IN THE EARLY CHURCH 183 the Roman practice, though he was willing to tolerate it for the sake of peace, appeared to him as treason to the Church. When he wrote : " Pro honore Ecclesise atque unitate pugna- mus," * we battle for the honor of the Church and for unity, he was hardly thinking of discipline alone. However, with all its regrettable features, the controversy contributed not a little towards clearing up an important point of doctrine, namely, that the validity of the sacraments does not depend on the faith and virtue of the minister. It was this that later on stood St. Augustine in good stead in his contention with the D*De Pitdia i, 11. DigiLizedbyGoOglc PENANCE IN THE EARLY CHURCH 189 tion of penance in the early Churdi is of interest to the History of Dogmas, quite enough has been said ia &e pre- ceding par^raphs. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER Xn FIRST ATTEMPTS AT SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY IN THE EAST' Until the latter part of the second century no attempt seems to have been made to establish Christian schools, in which the traditional teaching of the Church might be more or less scientifically investigated and explained. The first institu- tion of this kind, so far as the records go, was the catechetical school at Alexandria. Precisely when this school was started is a matter of conjecture, but about i8o it began to attract considerable attention. It was then under the able direction of Pantjenus, a converted Stoic philosopher. One of his most distinguished disciples was Clement, who some years later became his successor in the direction of the school. Clement in his turn was succeeded by his own disciple Origen, under whose guidance the school of Alexandria reached its highest fame. Pantsenus does not appear to have written any books, but his two immediate successors exerted great literary activity, and their works now call for a brief review. A — Clement of Alexandria Titus Flavins Oemens, as his name indicates, was probably descended from a freedman of the Christian consul of that name. After his conversion he studied under several masters, apparently without much satisfaction to himself, until he met Pantsenus in Egypt, and with him he found rest for his soul. He was entrusted with the direction of the school in 190, and continued tn office until the persecution of Septimus Severus, 202 or 203, forced him to withdraw. He was a man of wide 1 Cfr. Tixeront, H. D. I, 243-284; Duchesn^ The Early History of the Qiurch, I, 247-260; BatiSol, Primi- DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA 191 reading, in profane as well as in sacred literature, but his learning appears to have been extensive rather than profound. A saintly priest, and ever devoted to the interests of the faith, he nevertheless always cherished an ardent love for the philos- ophy of the past. He not only employed its methods in his exposition of Christian doctrine, but frequently also made use of its contents. It was by means of philosophy that Oement thot^ht he could devise a system of theological teaching which should indeed have faith for its solid and irremovable foundation, but in the building up of its superstructure should draw freely from the sources of natural knowledge. With this end in view he labored for many years at his great work. Intro- duction to Christianity, which consists of three parts called respectively Protrepticus, Paedagogus and Stromaia. The names are taken frwn the method supposedly followed by the Logos, who first admonishes, then trains, and lastly instructs. The three divisions, however, hang very loosely t<^ther, and so too does the reasoning in each part. The work is an attempt at systematizing, but withal a rather poor one. The leading thought that runs through the three divisions, and that gives some sort of unity to the whole, is the harmony that must necessarily exist between faith and knowledge. Both have their source in the same God, and although revela- tion and faith must ever hold the first and highest place in the Church of Christ, still philosophy and knowledge should not be excluded from her sacred precincts. There is a middle way between the rationalism of the Pseudo-Gnostics and the extreme supematuralism of many narrow-minded Catholics. There is a true gnosis as well as a false one ; a gnosis that is indeed not necessary for salvation, but that leads believing Christians to a higher perfection. With this thought in his mind, Clement begins the Protrepti- cus with an earnest invitation to the pagan world, urging the worshipers of false gods to turn away from the foolish songs of mythology and listen to the new canticle of the Logos, who came forth from Sion to teach the world true wisdom. Pagan gods and mysteries and their sacrificial wor^p are DigiLizedbyGoOglc 192 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES but idle vagaries, ugly excrescences of human reason gone astray; and although some philosophers and poets have tn many things proclaimed the truth, yet their conception of it was but shadowy and imperfect The full truth is found only in the Prophets, who were tau^t by the Holy Spirit. Their teaching is now completed by the Logos, who appeared on earth to cure the world of its moral diseases and make known to men the blessings of God. Once brought under the influence of the Logos, men must go through a course of training in Christian virtue. This is the object, and scope of the Paedagogus. The trainer is the Logos Himself, who through the teaching of faith shows His followers how to regulate their daily lives, in relation to God, the neighbor, and themselves. It is not fear that makes His training efficacious, but love and kindness. It is true, the Logos carries a rod, yet this is a symbol of grace rather than of punishment. In connection with this, the author points out the importance of faith and its sufficiency for all practical purposes of life. Faith, he says, is the perfection of knowledge. Holy Scrip- ture says, whoso believeth in the Son hath life everlastit^: what then is there beyond that should be wanting to fatth? Nothing : faith is perfect in itself and all-sufficient. However, the perfection of faith is only relative; it is a means of pre- paring us for what is greater. Beyond the perfection of faith here on earth, looms large the perfection of possession in heaven wherein are fulfilled the words of the Saviour: " Be it done unto thee as thou hast believed." Faith, then, as shown forth in the practice of virtue is suf- ficient; but faith may be perfected by knowledge, by the true gnosis, which not only accepts the teaching of the Logos and puts it into practice, but aims at an intimate understanding of the things of God. As in one sense faith is the perfection of knowledge, so in another sense is knowledge the perfection of faith. Beginning with faith and ever growing in grace, one must advance along the path of knowledge to a fuller realization of divine things. And so it is only the Gnostic who is a perfect Christian; not the Pseudo-<^ostic of the DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA 193 sects, but the true Gnostic whose life is in accord with the higher knowledge of the faith. Such a one ts indifferent to all adversity, is indefatigable in the practice of charity, and labors incessantly to promote the interests of God. Hence there are two kinds of Christians: the simple folk who are satisfied with believing, and the more intelligent who aim at gnosis. They are both dear to the Lord, but those who have gnosis are more perfect and therefore entitled to a higher degree of glory in heaven. In connection with this general stimmary of the contents of Clement's chief work, the following points, taken in sub- stance from Moehler's History of the Church, are deserving of special attention. They bring out with great clearness the Alexandrian doctor's position in regard to faith. As the Son of God has become truly man, divine teaching has become human and human teaching has become divine.* Faith is based on the authority of the Son of God. Who would be so rash as to demand proofs of God as he would of man?' The authority of Christ is represented by the Catho- lic Church, so that her teaching and her authority are the same as His.* Hence faith is the eternal foundation of all religious knowledge; it must guide us in all our studies of divine things." Religious knowledge is acquired by meditating on the truths of faith; faith, therefore, is the criterion of knowledge,' True gnosis, or gnosis according to the mind of the Church, is nothing else than a thorough understanding of the faith, taking due account of the grounds upon which it rests and the relation that exists between the various truths which form its con- tents.'' Religious knowledge and faith are of the same nature, and faith itself beckons us to the acquisition of knowledge.' Subjective faith is a clinging to the invisible, a union of the soul with the object of faith.' As man is free, his faith is essentially an act of obedience to God. Hence no demonstra- ' Paeda?. i, 2, 3, i. * Ibid, 7, la •Strom. 6, I. "Ibid, 6, 3; cfr. 7, i"^ 5?, 3. •Ibid 3, n-12; 7, 15-18. 'Ibid. 2, a-^; 5, i; cfr. Faedag. •Ibid. 2, 4, 11; 7, ic^ t& 3, 2, 8, 4r-eL •Ibid. 2, 2-4. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 194 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES tion can ever be the cause of faith ; it can do no more than make the truth acceptable. Faith depends on the will subject to the all-wise and all-truthful God. And because faith tims necessarily implies submission of the will, hence it belongs to man's moral life and must find issue in works. Faith wi&out works is dead.*" Besides the Introduction to Christianity, another little treatise has come down to us under the title, Quis Dives Sal- vetur. What Rich Man May Be Saved? In it the author gives a very sane and Christian exposition of the nature and use of property. Admitting the rights of private ownership, he points to the fact that the actual possessors of wealth are nevertheless only stewards of the Lord. They may not waste their possessions in extravagant living, but whatever they do not need for their own reasonable use they must employ in assisting the needy. Thus used, wealth becomes a means of salvation. Many points of doctrine are casually explained in these two works, especially in the first ; but only a few of them can here be mentioned. Something may also be gathered from the numerous fragments of his commentaries of Holy Scripture, which are usually cited under the title of Adumbrationes. The main points of interest in reference to the History of Dogmas are the following : 1°. Speaking of the Logos, Qement insists strongly on His eternal generation: as the Father was always Father, so the Logos was always Son ; and although He came forward at the moment of creation, yet thereby His state was not changed.** In this the view of the Apologists, as interpreted by many modem critics, is evidently corrected. 2°. The Logos is " evidentissime verus Deus " ; He is equal to the Lord of the universe, because He is His Son.*' He is one with the Father,** the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father: to both prayers are offered up by the faithful.** »» Strom, 6, 13 ; 7, S ; *S, 14, loS, 4- ^' Paedag. I, 8. >i Ibid. 7, 3 ; s, I ; Adumlwat in *• Paedag. i, 8, 62, 3 ; T, 7 ; Strom. Jconn. I, i; PaedaK. 1,8,63,3. Sr Mi 3, 13! S> 36; In Joan, i, i; >* Protrept 10^ 110, i. Pacoag. 3, 13, 100, 3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ST. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA 195 3". Of the Holy Ghost the author says nothing very spe- cial, yet he represents Him in passing as a divine person and inspirer of Holy Scripture. " There is indeed one Father of all, and also one Word of all, and one Holy Spirit, and He is everywhere." " Not one point of Holy Scripture shall pass away without its fulfillment: for the mouth of the Lord, the Holy Spirit, has spoken whatever is contained therein." ^^ Thus he conceives the Godhead as a Trias, or Trinity, and commenting on a text in the Timaeus of Plato, he says, " I understand this to refer to the Holy Trinity ; the third is the Holy Spirit, the second is the Son through whom all was made according to the will of the Father." '* The three must be adored as one God.*^ The Father is incomprehensible and ineffable being; the Son is wisdom, knowledge, truth, and all related thereto; the Holy Spirit is the light of truth, light without darkness, the Spirit of the Lord, who ccMnmunicates Himself without division to all." 4°. The world was created out of nothing: neither matter nor spirit is eternal, nor did souls exist before they were united to their bodies.^' Adam and Eve were created in infancy, and their sin consisted in having carnal relations before the time appointed by God. That sin was the source of all evil in the world, and since then no one is without sin, save only the Incarnate Logos. Still to each one only his own sins are imputed.*" The author speaks occasionally as if there were two souls in man, the one carnal and the other spiritual; however, he defines man as " composed of a rational and irra- tional part, of soul and body." '^ 5°. In Christ, the Incarnate Ixjgos, there are two natures and only one person. He is one Logos, both God and man; He is God-Man.'' The author seems to understand quite well the communicatio tdiomatum, and even holds that die union of the human and the divine elements in Christ was not dis- »'ProtrepL 1, 6,42, t;9,83,i. "Protrept 11, in, i; Strom. 5, "Strom. 5, 14. ^^LhJ^'Jk'^k "Paedag. 3, a. «Ibid. 6, 6, 16; 4, 3. '•Strom. 6, 16. «IbiA 5, 3; S. H; Paedag. i, 6; "Strom. 5, 14; 3> 13; 5r96^ 3> I- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 196 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES staved in death: "The Word living and buried with the Christ is exalted in heaven." '* Christ's human nature, though real like ours, was not affected by hunger or thirst or other corporal wants, nor was He Himself moved by passions of any kind. He came among us to be our redemption, our ransom, a propitiation for our sins, an immolated victim; He wishes to save all, but each one's salvation will depend on the use he makes of the redemption thus wrought.^ 6°. Those who wish to be saved must belong to the Church ; for she is the city of the Logos, the temple built by God.*" There is only one Church, the one that has come down to us from olden days, and which heretics try their utmost to split up into many.^ In this Church there are bishops, priests, and deacons, in imitation, the author thinks, of the angelic hierarchy.*^ Among the Apostles, Peter held the first place, the Primacy over all the rest; for Peter alone together with Himself the Saviour paid the tribute.^ 7°. Admission into the Church is by baptism. " Being bap- tized, we are enlightened; being enlightened, we are adopted as sons; being adopted, we are perfected; being perfected, we are made immortal : ' I,' saith He, ' have said, you are gods and sons of the Most High.' Baptism is designated in many ways, a grace, an illumination, perfection, and a bath. A bath, because in it we wash away our sins. A grace, because by it are remitted the punishments due to sins. An illumination, because in it we behold that holy and salutary light by which we see God Perfection, because that we call perfect to which nothing is wanting. For what can be wanting to him who knows God ? " "' 8°. The Eucharist is repeatedly referred to, but the author's way of speaking of it is not very satis factor)'. Although he clearly enough admits the Real Presence, he usually enlarges upon the symbolic aspect of the mystery. " The mixture of wProtrept n; Paedag. i, 5; i, "Strom. 7, >?. ">7. 3- 6. " Ibid. 6, 13, 107, 2. " Strom. 6, 0, 71, 2 ; 2, 6 ; Faedag. *• Quis Dives, 21, 3- 3, 12; 1. 6; Quia Div. 37. •» Paedag. i, 6, 26, 1-3. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN : ALEXANDRIA AND CESAREA 197 the two, that is, of the drink and the Word, is called the Eucharist ; that is to say, a praiseworthy and remarkable grace, by which those who partake of it are sanctified in body and soul." Still, " this it is to drink the blood of Jesiw, namely, to become a partaker of the incorruption of the Lord." " 9°. Of penance he says that theoretically Christians should not stand in need of it, since in baptism th^ have arisen to a new life; but practically they do, as experience only too plainly shows. Some sins are so grievous that they demand a public satisfaction and reconciliation, but this should not be granted more than once. For this ruling the author appeals to Hennas, whom he quotes on the subject." Even the sin of murder may thus be forgiven." For less grievous sins for^veness may always be obtained, provided the sinner submits to the chastising hand of God." 10°. Marriage among Christians he holds to be indissoluble, even in the case of adultery. This he proves from our Lord's words as recorded by St. Matthew." 11°. In his eschatological teaching the author prepared the way for Origen, in as much as he seems to hold that after the last judgment even the wicked shall finally be led to re- pentance and thus be reconciled to God.*' Thus it may be said that there is much wheat and some chaff in the teaching of Clement. His love of ancient philoso- phy carried him at times undoubtedly too far, as, for instance, in the excessive moral value he attached to gnosis; yet per- haps his worst fault lies in his allegorical interpretation of Holy Scripture: It is true, he explicitly teaches that the Sacred Writings, of both the Old and New Testament, are divinely inspired; but in his exegesis he frequently adopts the prin- ciples of Philo, and hence it not rarely happens that in his interpretation sober facts fade away into mere symbols. B — Origen: Alexandria and C^sabea Notwithstanding his vast learning, Clement of Alexandria ■'Ibid 2, 2, 19, 4; 30, I. *' Strom. 4, 34. •1 Strom. 2, 13, •* Ibid a, 23, 145, 3 ; 14^^ 3, 3. ■* Quis Dives, 43. *■ Ibid 7, 3 ; tik 14- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 198 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES did not achieve more than local fame. This is perhaps lat^ely accounted for by the greater brilliancy of Origen, his pupil and immediate successor in the direction of the school. Both men undertook practically the same task, in as much as their common aim was to place the traditional teaching of the Church on a scientific basis; but whilst Qement ended by philoso- phizing Christianity, Origen succeeded in synthesizing the- ology. He wrote the first Summa Theologica. Origen was bom of Christian parents, probably at Alex- andria. Whilst still a mere child, he was carefully instructed by his father, the martyr Leonidas, and thereafter at an early age he enterwl the school of Clement. When about seventeen years old, he lost his father, who was martyred for the faith, and thereby the duty of providing for a large and impoverished family devolved upon him. Yet so distinguished was he for learning and holiness that Demetrius, bishop of Alexandria, came shortly after this to his assistance by making him direc- tor of the catechetical school. For a number of years he dis- charged his duty with great success, although some of his views were not acceptable to his ecclesiastical superior. Whilst passing through Cassarea on his journey to Athens, whither he had been called to confer with certain heretics, he was ordained priest without the sanction of his bishop. This was made the pretext for severing his connection with the school. After several vain attempts on his part to bring about a recon- ciliation, first with Demetrius and then with his successor Heraclas, Origen permanently established himself at Qesarea, whither most of his pupils followed him. He died in 254, after having borne imprisonment and torture for the faith. During all these years, first at Alexandria and then at Oesarea, Origen was indefatigably active as a writer. Epi- phanius estimates his literary productions at six thousand vol- umes. Of course, by volumes he understands rolls, volumina, or totnoi, several of which would be required to make a fair sized volume as we take the term. To facilitate this enor- mous output, a rich and devoted friend, Ambrose by name, placed at his disposal a numerous staff of stenographers and copyists, who tcxik down his lectures and then copied them DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN : ALEXANDRIA AND CvESAREA 199 for distribution. Most of these writings, including the cele- brated Hexapla or six-column Bible, have perished. Of those that have come down to us his two treatises. Against Celsus and On First Principles or Peri Archon, are the most famous. It is this latter that contains his system of theology. A brief summary of it may be given as follows; we must bear in mind, however, that by " First Principles " the author understands fundamental doctrines and leading articles of the faith. By way of preface the author states that the source and fountain of all truth is none other than the teaching of Christ and the Apostles. This lives on in the Church, and therefore her preaching is the criterion and norm of truth. However, as the Apostles gave a clear exposition of those truths only which they deemed necessary for all, whilst such others as are not so necessary they simply stated without explaining them, there is room for further study and investigation on the part of those who are capable of deriving fruit from such labors. And this same plan the Church also follows, teaching that certain doctrines must be accepted, whilst others are still open for discussion. Then follows a brief summary of the truths that are of faith, namely: The existence of God, creator of all things, who, though incomprehensible in the perfection of His being, may yet in some way be known from the works of His hands. The divinity of the Son, His incarnation, virginal birth. His death for our redemption, His resurrection and ascension into heaven. The existence of the Holy Ghost, associated with the Father and the Son, who is the inspirer of the Old and New Testament, and the sanctifier of souls. The immortality of the soul, man's free will, future reward and punishment ac- cording to each one's deeds. The existence of good and bad angels, the former assisting man in the work of salvation and the latter tempting him to evil. The creation of the world, its beginning in time, and its future ruin. The inspira- tion of Scripture, and its having both a literal and a spiritual Questions still open for discussion are the following: Is DigiLizedbyGoOglc 20O THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES the Holy Ghost b^otten (originated? created?) or not? Is He also the Son of God? Docs the soul come ex traduce seminis? Are the demons fallen angels? What was there before the world was created? And what shall there be after it has ceased to exist? When were the angels created? Are God and spirits without a body? And in what sense? Have stars souls or not? According to his plan of work, then, it is the authorized teaching of the Church on which his theological synthesis is to rest. If, in obedience to the precept, " Enlighten yourself with the lamp of knowledge," a doctrinal compendium is to be drawn up, rationally designed as an organic whole, here are the elements which must be knit together as a solid founda- tion. Make use of clear and indisputable inference; draw from Holy Scripture whatever can be found there or deduced from it ; consult the certain teaching of the living Church ; and then from all these various sources form one single body of doctrine. This is truly an excellent plan, none more serviceable could well be devised; but in the hands of Origen, owing largely to his allegorical interpretation of Scripture, it yielded at times rather unsatisfactory results. In passing it may be noted, that this doctrinal compendium was not intended for simple believers, but for scholars who were familiar with the speculations of the Gnostics and non-Christian philosophers. It was meant to be an antidote against the various errors of the day, which threatened to lead astray some of the more studious among the flock of Christ, The body of the work is divided into four books. In the first book tiie author treats of God, His oneness and spiritu- ality, of the Logos and the Holy Spirit, and of the angels. In the second he takes up the study of the world, of mankind, of redemption through Christ, of the end of creation and the last things. In the third he investigates the freedom of man's will, the struggle between good and evil, the beginning of the world in time and its final consummation. In the fourth he explains his views on inspiration and exegesis. In most instances particular articles of the faith are fir^ briefly stated. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN: ALEXANDRIA AND C^SAREA 201 tiien philosophically examined, and finally proved by argu- ments drawn chiefly from Holy Scripture. The development may be sketched in a few lines. God is essentially one, unchangeable, and good. Because of His ■goodness, He must reveal and communicate Himself; because of His unchangeableness. He must reveal and communicate Himself from all eternity; because of His essential oneness, He can directly do neither the one nor the other : therefore He needs a minister of creation and revelation. This min- ister is the Word, begotten of the substance of the Father, coetemal and consubstantial with Him. Being consubstan- tial with the Father, the Word is true God; but being also capable of coming into direct contact with the relative and the manifold, He is in some way inferior to the Father. He is true God, but not the God. The Holy Ghost is thus obviously outside the scope of the author's reasoning, but forced by Holy Scripture and the teaching of the Church he brings Him into the exposition of his system, associating Him with the Father and the Son in one trinity of divine persons. Apparently, however, this Trinity corresponds but imperfectly with the true Christian concept of the mystery. All three persons are indeed said to be truly divine, but at the same time they are represented as if they were unequal in perfection, and are certainly con- ceived to be dissimilar in their sphere of action. " God the Father, holding all things together, reaches to each of the things that are, imparting being to each from His own ; for He is absolutely. Compared with the Father the Son is less, reaching to rational things only, for He is second to the Father. And the Holy Ghost again is inferior, extending His operation to the saints only. So that in this respect the power of the Father is greater, in comparison with the Son and the Holy Spirit ; and the power of the Son more, in com- parison with the Holy Spirit ; and again the power of the Holy Spirit more exceeding, in comparison with all other holy b«ngs." *• Again, because God is essentially good and at the same time "•De Princ i, 3, 5. Digiiizedby-C^OOglC 202 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES essentially unchangeable, and omnipotent from all eternity, hence eternal creation must be admitted. But as- matter can- not be eternal, it follows that spiritual beings were created first. They were endowed with freedom of choice, but abused it almost immediately and fell into sin. Then the material world was created, in order to subject the fallen spirits to a purifying discipline. They were then imprisoned in bodies, more or less gross in proportion to the gravity of their sin. Thus the bodies of angels are ethereal, those of men simply material, whilst the bodies of demons are " grotesque and horrible." To assist men in their temptations and struggles, to which this purifying discipline gives rise, the Word sent them Prophets in the days of old, and finally Himself assumed human nature, perfect in body and pure in soul, and through His sufferings and death wrought the redemption of all. This redemption, however, although it is truly a payment of our debt and an emancipation from the power of Satan, does not primarily effect an elevation of our nature to a divine sphere; it removes obstacles, strengthens by example, and enlightens by the infusion of a higher knowledge. The end of all things implies a universal restoration, an apokatastasis, when all reasonable beings, having repented of their faults under the chastising hand of God, shall be reconciled to their Maker, Yet as they still remain free, it is possible that they may fall again, and thus be forced to begin once more the cycle of purification. Finally, Holy Scripture, whence our knowledge of revealed truths is chiefly drawn, has a triple sense: somatic, psychic, and pneumatic. The first of these is the literal and historical meaning of the text, intended for the simple. The second is spiritual, and is meant for those who have already somewhat advanced in the appreciation and understanding of divine truths. The third is mystic, and is for the perfect. There are many passages in the Old Testament, and also some in the New, that have no literal meaning; they must be inter- preted in a spiritual sense. Hence the all^orical interpre- tation of Scripture is not only justified, but becomes a matter DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN : ALEXANDRIA AND CESAREA 203 of necessity. In fact, Holy Scripture, like all visible crea- tion, is but symbol of the invisible things of God. It is only the spiritually oilightened who can interpret it aright. From this brief outline of the treatise it is sufficiently dear that the author's intention of building upon the solid founda- tion of Holy Scripture and approved tradition was not alto- gether realized. In fact, on several points he went decidedly astray ; and one is not surprised that his bishop on account of doctrines here set forth, as is probable, should have removed him from his post of head-master in the catechetical school of Alexandria. But in passing judgment on him, two things must be borne in mind. The first is, as already stated above, that he intended his treatise as a counterpoise to the teaching of the Gnostics, trying to show by philosophical argumentation the unreasonableness of Dualism, Emanationism, and Doce- tism; and in this he succeeded admirably. The second is that he sincerely endeavored to safeguard the traditional teaching of the Church, and as a consequence wherever he simply states doctrines to be admitted by all, he is usually quite orthodox. Only where he explains points which to his way of looking at them had not yet been determined by any authorized teach- ing, whether of Scripture or tradition, does he allow himself to be carried to extremes. Hence whilst he is an unsafe teacher, he is still a reliable witness. Furthermore, as judged by what he says in his other extant works, his commentaries on Holy Scripture, his treatise Contra Celsum, and his tractate On Prayer, he appears in a somewhat different light. Thus, commenting on Romans, 9, 5, where the Apostle says that Christ " is over all things, God blessed forever," he speaks of the Trinity in a perfectly orthodox sense. " Both (the Father and the Son) are one God, because the Son has no other source of divinity than the Father ; but, as Wisdom says, the Son is a most pure emanation of the one paternal fountain. Therefore Christ is over all things God. But He who is over ail things, has no one over Himself. For He is not below the Father, but of the Father. And this very same has the Wisdom of God given us to understand of the Holy Spirit, when it says : ' The Spirit of the Lord hath DigiLizedbyGoOglc 204 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES filled the whole world, and that which containeth all things hath knowledge of the voice.' If, therefore, the Son is called God over all, and the Holy Spirit is said to contain all, and the Father is He of whom all have their being, it is siiown to evidence that the nature of the Trimty and the substance is one, and this is over all." " Again, in a fragment of his commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews he says that the Son is begotten of the substance of the Father, that He is komoousios with the Father, that there was never an instant when He was not the Son."" In alt this the author clearly anticipates the definition of Nicsea. In Christ he clearly distinguishes between the two natures, the divine and the human. " In the first place it behooves us to know, that in Christ the nature of His divinity, by rea- son of which He is the only-begotten Son of the Father, is one thing, and another is His human nature, which He as- sumed in these latter times according to the divine dispensa- tion." •" Yet, though the two natures are distinct, they are not separate, but are so intimately conjoined in the unity of person, that the properties of the one can in the concrete be predicated of the other. Hence it is that the human nature, as united to the divinity, " is justly called the Son and the Power of God, Christ and the Wisdom of God; and again the Son of God, through whom all things were created, is Styled Jesus Christ and the Son of man. For the Son of God also is said to have died, in that nature, of course, which was capable of being affected by death ; and He is called the Son of man, who, according to the teaching of faith, shall come with the holy angels in the glory of the Father, And for this reason, throu^out the whole Scripture, the divine nature is designated by terms applicable to human beings, and the human nature is honored with divine appellations."*" Thus the author gives a perfectly correct application of the cotnmuni- catio idiomatum, which is based upon the hypostatic union. The object of Christ's coming into the world was the re- demption of mankind. " For the people did this man die. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN : ALEXANDRIA AND CESAREA 205 who was purer than all living beings ; He bore our sms and iniirmities, as He was able to pay for and to destroy and to blot out all the sins of the whole world taken upon Himself, because He had done no inquity, nor was deceit found in His mouth, nor did He know sin."*' Hence Christ's satisfaction was vicarious. It was also a propitiatory sacrifice, the Saviour of the worid offering Himself as a victim of propitiation to His Father.*" Then, along with this perfectly orthodox view, the author develops the idea of a ransom being paid to the evil one, so that we might be justly freed from the slavery of Satan.^ The redemption is universal in the widest sense of the term, extending not only to the whole human race, but likewise to all other reasonable beings.** Freed from sin by the redemption thus wrought, men must work out their salvation by making a good use of their free will and the graces bestowed upon them by God. In this they are assisted by the Church of Christ The author's ecclesiology appears to be quite orthodox. The Church, he says, is one all over the world, and no person is a true Chris- tian unless he belongs to the Church which takes its name from Christ*" Out of the Church there is no salvation, and if any one separates himself from her communion, he is guilty of his own destruction,*" Christ built His Church upon Peter, who is its solid foundation.*'' The faithful are under the juris- diction of the bishop, who is assisted by priests and deacons.** Of baptism he says that it washes away all sins, and as little children are also sinners, the Church, following Apostolic tra- dition, teaches that they should be baptized.*" The baptism of water may, however, be supplied by martyrdom, whidi is the baptism of blood."" The author touches the question of penance in several dif- ferent places, but his position is not altc^ether dear. In his treatise Contra Celsum, he indicates the general rule followed "In Joan. 28, 18 (l6o>. «In Exod. 5, 4. " In Horn, 3, 8l *• De Orat 38, 4 ; cfr, Omtr. Cels. ** In Matt 16, la 3, SI. **In Joaa I, 40. '*' *■ Contr. Celsum, i 16. *• In Jesu Nave, Horn. 3, 5, DigiLizedbyGoOglc 2o6 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES by the Christians in r^^ard to those who sin grievously. " Those," he says, " who fall into sin, and especially such as give themselves up to licentiousness, the Christians separate from their communion. . . . They mourn as lost and dead to God those who have fallen through lust or who have com- mitted any other crime; and they regard them as having been raised from the dead, when they have so changed their ways that they deserve readmission. However, they are admitted less readily than those who are received for the first time; and because they have fallen after pledging their fidelity to the principles of our religion, they are forbidden to hold any place of honor and superiority in the said Church of God." " In another place he enumerates several kinds of penance; one of which, he says, is more laborious than the rest, because it includes the confession of sins that have been committed." And this confession is to be made to the priests of the Church, who, in imitation of their Master, impart to the people the forgiveness of their sins," To the priests it also belongs to determine whether public penance should be performed for the sins confessed to them." However, although the min- istry of forgiveness belongs to all the priests, it does so more particularly to the bishop."^ Sins that must be confessed are divided into mortal faults and mortal crimes. For the former one can always obtain pardon ; as regards the latter, the author is apparently not consistent in his views. In one place he expresses his astonishment that priests should presume to pardon any of them, that is, apostasy, homicide, and adultery."* In another he states that deliberate and full apostasy is un- pardonable." In a third he holds that pardon may be granted once." And finally in a fourth place he implies that they may be pardoned repeatedly."* Anent this apparent contradiction, Tixeront gives it as his opinion that " Origen, as well as Tertullian, regarded the •1 Cont. Cels. 3, 5i- " IWd. aS. "In Levit. Horn, a, 4. "In Matt 114. M In Levit. s. 3 ; cf r. Ibid. 3, 4. »• In LeviL 15, a. ■*In Num. Horn. 10, I. "lUd. 11, 2. " In Levit 15, 3; cfr. De Orat iB. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN: ALEXANDRIA AND C^SAREA 207 crimina mortalia as beyond forgiveness: but he has been corrected in this point, as in many others." ■" Practically the same view is taken by Rauschen,^^ and many other modem critics. D'Ales, on the other hand, and perhaps the majority of dogmatic theologians contend that the contradiction is only apparent, and that, " whAi Origen speaks of unpardonable sins in his De Oratione, he does not imply that they are unpardonable in se, but unpardonable on account of the malice of unrepentant sinners or the laxity of priests who fail to dispose them to penance." *' All things considered, this ap- pears to be the more probable view. Origen's teaching on the Eucharist is in the main quite satis- factory. He speaks of the consecrated elements as containing the real body and blood of Christ, which, he says, the faithful receive with the greatest care and reverence, lest some particles should fall to the ground; and if this were to happen through their own fault, he adds, they would be guilty indeed. They do not take so much care in preserving the word of God.'^ In another place he states that besides this common understanding of the Eucharist, one may also take a spiritual view of it, ac- cording to which the consecrated elements are symbols of the teaching of Christ.^^ He also holds that the Eucharist is a true sacrifice. The Christian altar, he says, is not flowing with the blood of animals, but is consecrated by the precious blood of Jesus Christ" The material elements are consecrated by the " prolatum verbum," and it is from this that the sanctifying power of the Eucharist is derived.*' In his references to matrimony, the author stands for the indissolubility of the marriage bond, proving his view from the teaching of Holy Scripture.®'' He remarks, however, that stHne " EcclesijE rectores " have occasionally allowed persons to act contrary to this teaching ; but, he adds, they did so most likely in order to avoid a greater evil." It is God who unites *" O. c. 278. •• In Num. Horn. 24, i ; In Jesu *> Euctianst and Penance, 180 sq. Nave, a, i ; S, 6. ML'fidit dc Calliste; L« Thfol- "In Matt. Ii, I4. ogic de S. Hippolyte, 44 sq. •' Ibid. 14, 23. •» In Exod. Horn. 13, 3. •» Ibid. "Ibid. 13, 3,5- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 2o8 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES husband and wife, so that they are no longer two but one; and because it is God who tuiites them, therefore the unicm is to them a source of grace.^" As a reason for the baptism of little children, as was said above, the author adduces the fact that they too are sinners. This would seem to imply his belief in the existence of original sin. The same inference may be drawn from several other statements. Thus he holds tjiat the soul on its union with the body contracts a moral stain, because it is united to a body of sin.'"* And in his commentary on the Epistle to the Ro- mans he argues that as Adam begot his first child only after he had committed sin, he necessarily transmitted a sin-stained body; and as all men were contained in Adam whilst dwelling in paradise, so were they all with him and in him expelled therefrom, all being subject to the consequences of that first sin.^' Many other points of orthodox teaching might be gathered from the author's writings, but these are sufficient for our purpose. It is indeed easy enough to draw up from his vari- ous works, especially from his De Principiis, a long list of propositions that deserve the severest censure, as was actually done some three hundred years after his death ; but it is not less easy to make him a staunch defender of orthodox Chris- tianity as it existed in his day. He unhesitatingly accepted the teaching of the Church, whether it was drawn from oral tra- dition or from the written word, but beyond its obvious and literal meaning, which he had no intention of setting aside, he sought for a higher spiritual sense, which would give him a deeper insight into the mysteries of God. In this his alle- gorizing tendency carried him at times too far; still it must not be forgotten that the conclusions thus arrived at were not meant to supplant the Church's ordinary teaching as it was explained to the simple. Thus when he says that the Holy Eucharist is the real body and blood of the Saviour, he under- stands and accepts the proposition in its literal sense ; but the ; cfr. Contr. DigiLizedbyGoOglc ORIGEN: ALEXANDRIA AND CESAREA 209 reality of the Saviour's presence is to him at the same time a symbol of God's loving and merciful revelation to men, and so he does not hesitate to speak of the Eucharist as the word of God. If this be borne in mind, most of Origen's alleged aberrations, at least in matters which were then clearly taught by the Church, will disappear. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER XIII FROM THE DEATH OF ORIGEN TO THE COUNCIL OF NICEA Between the close of Origen's troubled and brilliant career and the opening of the Council of Nicjea, nearly three-quarters of a century later, no theologian of particular eminence ap- peared of whom we have any record. This is especially true of the West. Cyprian died in 258, and his immediate suc- cessors have left us nothing that is worthy of note. There were indeed a few writers, like Amobius, Commodian, Lac- tantius, and Victorinus of Pettau, who employed their literary talents in defense of the faith or in the exposition of Christian doctrine, but they added nothing to what had already been accomplished by those who went before them. Amobius was a recent convert and apparently but poorly instructed in the faith which he tried to defend ; Commodian, probably a Jewish proselyte before his conversion to Christianity, was a poet, who appealed to his readers' imagination rather than to their reason ; Lactantius, the Christian Cicero, was more skilful in discomfiting his pagan adversaries than in enlightening his fellow-believers ; whilst Victorinus of Pettau confined himself almost exclusively to Scriptural exegesis, and of his many works only his commentary on the Apocalypse has come down to us. Hence about them nothing need be said in the History of Dc^;mas. The East indeed produced some men of note, but even the best of them can hardly be compared with the writers of the first half of the third century. Some of these men, as Her- aclas, Dionysius, Theognastus, Pierius, and Peter of Alex- andria, succeeded Origen in the direction of the Alexandrian school, and likely enough they were quite competent as teach- ers; but with one or two exceptions, the few fragments of thur works that are still extant give no indication of par- DigiLizedbyGoOglc FROM ORIGEN TO NIC.EA I 21 1 ticular ability. Others, like Gregory Thaumaturgus, Metho- dius of Olympus, and Hieracas of L^topoHs, were constantly engaged in the discharge of their pastoral duties and had but littie opportunity of accomplishing anything noteworthy ^ong the lines of literary pursuits. Still in what remains of the works of these various writers, there are some points worth gathering; especially in the matter of Trinitarian and Christo- l<^ical teaching. We may begin with Dionysius, who from the head-master- ship of the catechetical school was raised to the episcopal see of Alexandria. He is best known to us from his correspond- ence with his namesake, the Bishop of Rome. In a letter written to refute the error of Sabellius, he used expressions which seemed to deny the consubstantiality of the Son with the Father. On account of this he was denounced to the Pope, and by him was called upon to clear himself of the charge of heterodox teaching. The Pope's letter itself con- tains a point worth noticing. After condemning those who identify the person of the Son with that of the Father, as Sabellius did, and those others who would make the Son a creature, as was afterwards done by Arius, he sets forth the teaching of the Church in the following terms : " We must neither divide the wonderful and divine Monad into three divinities, nor destroy the dignity and exceeding greatness of the Lord by considering Him a creature: but we must have faith in God the Father Almighty, and in Christ Jesus His Son, and in the Holy Ghost, and in the union of the Word with the God of the universe, ' for the Father and I,' He says, ' are but one, and I am in the Father and the Father is in me.' Thus both the Trinity and the holy preaching of the Mon- archy will be safeguarded."* This is truly a precious relic of tfiird-century theology, representing as it does the faith of the West in the Trinity and the divine sonship, and being at the same time a precise statement of the faith by the Head of the Church. The answer of the bishop of Alexandria is also quite satis- > Atlunuius, De Decret Nk. Syn. 15, 33. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 212 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES factory. After calling attenticMi to the fact that examples and comparisons may be strained beyond the limits of truth, and thus be made to imply what was never intended by the author, he says : " There never was a time when God was not Father. . . . And as the Son is the Splendor of Eternal Light, so He Himself also is strictly eternal. As the word in the mind is distinct from the mind, and yet one with it, the one being in the other; so too the Father and the Son, although distinct, are one." " And to the charge that he had not used the term homoousios, consubstantial, when speaking of the Son, he replies, that the omission resulted not from his denying the applicability of the term to the Son, but simply from his not having found it in Holy Scripture.* Then the other charge, that he makes the three hypostases or persons so many portions of the Godhead, he answers by saying: "Three there are though they (the adversaries) like it not, or they must utterly destroy the Divine Trinity. We extend the Monad indivisibly into the Triad, and conversely gather to- gether the Triad without diminution into the Monad."' This perfectly satisfied the Pope, because it was thoroughly orthodox. The same doctrine is found in the few fragments of the work of Theognastus, preserved by St. Athanasius. Although there are some traces of Subordinationism, yet when speaking of the generation of the Son, the author says that ibe Son is bom of the substance of the Father, an expression that found its way into the Nicene Creed. He also insists strongly on the Son's full and perfect likeness in essence to the FaUier.' St. Gregory Thauraaturgus is even more explicit In his Exposition of the Faith he has expressions like the following: "One God, Father of the Living Word . . . perfect pro- genitor of a perfect offspring. Father of the only-b^otten Son. One Lord, God of God, figure and image of the God- bead, the Word, creator of all things; true Son of true God. And one Holy Spirit, who has His substance from God, and who through the Son appeared to men; the perfect DigiLizedbyGoOglc FROM ORIGEN TO NICMA I 213 image of the Son, the life and cause of all life. A perfect trinity, not divided nor separated in glory and eternity and rule. Nor is there anything created or in servitude in the Trinity; nor anything superinduced, as it first not there and then added thereto. And thus neither was the Son ever want- ing to the Father, nor the Spirit to the Son ; but without varia- tion and without change, the same Trinity ever abideth."* Bearing in mind that Gregory was a disciple and ardent ad- mirer of Origen, the latter's teaching on the Trinity may perhaps appear in a somewhat new light ; for it is hardly con- ceivable that the devoted disciple should he so correct, if the master had gone altogether astray. St. Peter of Alexandria is noted chiefly for his opposition to Origen. He severely censures the latter's teaching on the preexistence of souls, and on their union with a body in con- sequence of sin. He also finds fault with Origen's doctrine on the resurrection, as not sufficiently safeguarding the iden- tity of the risen body with that which each one had during life. These strictures are just enough if no allowance be made for Origen's philosophical speculations, as was pointed out in the preceding chapter. Christ, according to Peter's teach- ing, was God by nature, and became man by nature. In the Incarnation ^e Word became true man, but He did not lay aside His divinity,' St. Methodius of Olympus finds the same fault with Ori- gen. Man was eternally with God, he says, as a possible being; as something that might be called into existence, but he was wholly created in time.' Man is a sort of microcosm, summing up the whole world in himself." He was endowed by His Creator with freedom and immortality, and made to the likeness of God.'" Adam fell, and as a consequence we are all inclined to sin. " When man was deceived by the devil, he violated the commandment of God, and thenceforth sin, propagated by this contumacy, took up its abode in him. . . . For deprived of the divine gifts and utterly pros- • P. G. la 9 DigiLizedbyGoOglc 214 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES trated, we have become a prey to concupiscence, which the cunning serpent and shrewd deceiver excited in us." " To remedy the evil thus introduced into the world, the Word of God became incarnate, being at the same time true God and true man.^^ He was the second Adam, the representa- tive of the human race, who laid down his life for the sins of the world." The fruit of His redemption is treasured up in the Church, His spouse and the mother of His children.^* These children are bom to Him in baptism, which makes the recipients so many other Christs.^" Besides these fragments, there is an anonymous treatise belonging to this period, entitled, On the Right Faith, which was formerly ascribed to Origen. It was directed against the Marcian and Valentinian heresies, but incidentally gives also an exposition of Catholic doctrines. The author, who calls himself Adamantius, professes his faith in the eternal and consubstantial Word, and in the Holy Spirit, who is also eternal.*' The Word, he says, is Son of God by nature, whilst men are children of God only by adoption." He remained truly God in the Incarnation, but also truly assumed flesh from the Virgin Mary.*® The Catholic Church, he states in an- other place, is the sole depository of truth, and those who leave her communion necessarily fall into error. True Christians are called Catholics because they are spread all over the world,^' There is also a reference to the Holy Eucharist, which the author calls the communion of the body and blood of Christ.*" Like St. Irenasus before him, he adduces the Real Presence as an argument against the Valentinians, who held that matter was essentially evil. A few other points of interest might be gathered from the scattered fragments belonging to this period, but these will sufhce for our purpose. They are only few in number, but "Ibid. 8, 6, 8; 8. . " De Recta Fide, i, - .--.-,„, ,.,„.„ "Ibid. 3, 9. ■Ibid. 3, 3. 4, S. 8; De Res. 3, »» Ibid. 5, 39; 4. iS;S.7. II. "Ibid. 5, a8; 1,8. * Banquet, 3, 8. *oibid. 2, 2a DigiLizedbyGoOglc FROM ORIGEN TO NIC^A I 215 of inestimable value. They present to us in the clearest pos- sible light the faith of both East and West on two points of doctrine which a quarter of a century later were to stir the Christian world to its very depths. Their preservation appears truly providential. As the present chapter concludes our review of Antenicene theology, it seems in place here to say a word about doctrinal development as referred to this particular period of time. Was there any real progress in the Church's teaching since the days of the Apostolic Fathers? Was there anything like development in her theology? Or did she simply hand down from generation to generation what she had received from the Apostles and their immediate successors in the days of old? Both of these questions may be answered in the ailfirmative. but each under a different aspect. The Church simply handed down what she had received in so far as the contents of her doctrines came in question : the deposit of faith remained ever the same. Nothing is found in die orthodox writers of the third century that was not in some way implied or referred to by the men who wrote at the beginning of the second. Under this aspect there was no development. But the matter looks quite different when the explicit presentation and pre- cise exposition of particular doctrines are considered. Then there is noticeable a progress and development that becomes ever more striking as time passes on. This is especially true in reference to the Blessed Trinity, the true Godhead of the Son, the unity of person and duality of natures in Christ, the constitution of the Church and her importance in the economy of salvation, the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the Eucharist, the sacrificial character of the Eucharistic rite, and the nature of the Church's intervention in the remission of post-baptismal sins. To realize this, one need but compare the somewhat vague association of the Son and the Holy Ghost with the Father, as found in sub-Apostolic writers, with the precise Trinitarian formula worked out by Tertullian and freely used by Dionysius of Rome and his namesake of Alexandria. Or the indefinite expression Son of God, as implyii^ the divinity of Christ, DigiLizedbyGoOglc 2i6 THE FIRST THREE CENTURIES with the explicit declaratitm of the Seal's consubstantiality made by these same authors. Or, again, the simple statement of earlier writers that the Word becaine man with the definite teaching of third-century authors that the Word Incarnate is one person subsisting in two natures. And so all aloi^ the various lines of theological thought as indicated above. Noth- ing was added, nothing was tdcen away, but what was ever present gradually crystallized into clearer concepts and ex- panded into fuller statements. There was indeed no change, but there was growth. And the same is more or less true of other points of doc- trine. The veneration of martyrs, sacrifice and prayers for the dead, the Divine Motherhood of the Virgin, all at first referred to in a somewhat casual way, were by the end of the third century universally accepted as evidently contained in the authorized teaching of the Church. By that time also the New Testament canon was practically fixed, and the inspiration of Holy Scripture was placed beyond dispute. There appears a similar progress in the manifest recogni- tion of the Primacy of Rome. Merely implied in the Prima Oementis, and more or less incidentally referred to in the letter of Ignatius to the Romans, the fact of the Primacy is definitely stated hy Irenaeus and Cyprian, and the rights in- volved therein are unhesitatingly exercised by successive Popes. The position taken by Victor in the paschal dispute, by Cal- listus in the matter of penance, by Stephen in the baptismal controversy, and by Dionysius in reference to his namesake of Alexandria, shows how thoroughly these Pontiffs were convinced that as successors of St Peter they had at once the right and the duty to feed the whole flock of Christ. And although at times, in the heat of controversy, the Pope's au- thority was apparently disregarded by individuals, nevertheless the Christian world as a whole was always ready to acknowl- edge the universal jurisdiction of the incumbent of the Rc«nan see. For that see was to them the see of Peter, and the Pc^ was admitted to be Peter's successor. Hence the wdl attested historical fact, that not only orthodox Ushops and teadiers, but heresiardis as well, ever sought to strengthen DigiLizedbyGoOglc FROM ORIGEN TO NIC^A I 217 their position by endeavoring to obtain the support of Rcune. They well knew that communion with Rome was universally regcmled as communion with the Church of Christ There was as yet little or no theorizing about the Pope's Primacy, but as a mere fact that Primacy was well understood and readily admitted. And thus without the intervention of general councils, without any formal definition of the faith issued by the Head of the Church, the ordinary magisterium, guided by the Spirit of truth and watched over by the Vicar of Christ, not only warded off ail dangers from the preaching of God's word, but also directed orthodox teaching with a firm hand along the ever lengthening lines of legitimate doctrinal development. In the following periods we shall see this development proceed more rapidly, owing to the rise of wide-spread heresies and the consequent decisive action of general councils; but the final outc P. G. 18, 548 •!• DigiLizedbyGoOglc 224 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS As neither the contending parties nor the Pope made any objection, an invitaticm was sent to such bishops of the Empire as could be reached, and means of transportation were pro- vided by the State. About 300 answered the summons, al- though tradition gives the total number as 318. These were mostly from Asia Minor, Syria, and Egypt. From the West strictly so called only a few attended, but they seem to have been men of ability and of some importance. Pope Sylvester sent as his representatives the Roman presbyters Vitus and Vincent, Spain was represented by Hosius of Cordova, Gaul by Nicasius of Dijon, Calabria by the Metropolitan Mark, Fannonia by Domnus of Stridon, and Africa by Cxcilius of Carthage. Among those present were also several bishops who had suffered for the faith and still bore upon their per- sons the marks of conflict There was Paul of Neocsesarea with his burnt hands, Amphion of Epiphania, one of whose eyes had been plucked out, the venerable Paphnutius also blind in one eye and lame from his long sufferings in the metal mines, and his companion Potamon who had endured the same tortures. It was towards the middle of June, 325, that the bishops assembled in the great hall of the imperial palace at Nicsea in Bithynia. On the whole it was a venerable assembly, although not all the bishops gathered there were distinguished either for learning or for sanctity; nor were all of them entirely orthodox in their doctrinal views. In fact, Theonas of Mar- marica and Secundus of Ptolmais, as the event showed, were in full accord with Arius, whilst Euscbius of Nicomedia, Theo- gonis of Nicsea, and Maris of Chalcedon, at least supported him in his opposition to Alexander. The Emperor himself was present in state, but he did not take part in the transac- tions of the Council, in so far as they touched matters of faith; nor did he interfere with freedom of discussion on either side. As the Acts have not been preserved, the mode of procedure cannot be established with any degree of cer- tainty ; nor is it certain who acted as president, although it is rather commonly assumed that this honor was conferred on DigiLizedbyGoOglc THE COUNCIL OF NIC.EA 225 Hosius, who is also stq)posed to have been deputed by die Pope as his legate. In order to understand at all the events that followed the dissolution of the Council, it is necessary here to call attention to the work which the assembled bishops were, in the first instance, expected to accomplish. They had not been sum- moned from distant parts of the Empire to decide whether Christ was true God. Nor even, assuming His true divinity, to define in what precisely His relation to the Father con- sisted. This latter point might, and in fact did come before the Council by way of supplement to its principal work ; but it was not the main point at issue. The Council was summoned to decide the quarrel between Arius and Alexander; that is, to determine whether Arius had been justly condemned and deposed by his own bishop in view of his doctrinal position. This, as is obvious, necessitated an examination of the teaching of Arius by the assembled bishops, and this examination led to animated discussion; but at no stage of the deliberation was the true Godhead of Christ considered open for debate. Hence as soon as Arius openly avowed his views before the council, all further discussion was at an end. With the excep- tion of his followers already mentioned, the bishops would not listen to such blasphemous utterances as that the Word was not truly Son of God, that He was not true God, that there had been a time when He did not exist ; and hence the sentence passed upon Arius by his own bishop was not only sustained but explicitly confirmed. If this fact, so obvious from the fragmentary records we have of what took place, be over- looked, the Arian controversy can lead to only one conclusion, namely, that before the Council of Nicsea the true divinity of the Son and His eternal generation from the substance of the Father were not fundamental doctrines of the faith. And this conclusion is absolutely false, as appears quite clearly from what has been said on these points in the preceding chap- ters. It was only when this main work, the condemnation of Arius as jud^ by his own teaching, was accon^tUshed, and DigiLizedbyGoOglc 226 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS the supplementary task of defining the orthodox faith in pre- cise terms was undertaken, that a real difference of views mani- fested itself. As already mentioned, some of the assembled bishops were by no means learned men ; others, although suf- ficiently versed in matters of faith, preferred to leave well enough alone ; others again, whilst admitting the true divinity of the Son, were inclined to hold that He must be in some way subordinated to the Father, so as to save the absolute oneness of God and at the same time to avoid all appearance of Sabellianism. Hence when it was proposed to draw up a Creed which would make all subterfuge on the part of Arius and his followers impossible, there was considerable disa- greement about the terms to be adopted. However, when Eusebius of Nicomedia submitted a symbol of faith that favored the views of Arius, it was promptly rejected. An- other one substituted by Eusebius of Czesarea was pronounced too vague in its phraseology to serve as a test of orthodoxy, although it seems that this was finally adopted, after such clauses had been inserted as would place the true divinity of the Son and His eternal generation in the clearest possible light. It reads as follows : " We believe in one God the Father all-sovereign, maker of all things both visible and invisible And in one Lord Jesus Christ the Son of God, the Only-Begotten of the Father, that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, Very God of Very God ; begotten and not made, consubstan- tial with the Father, by whom all was made, both the things that are in heaven and the things that are on earth : who for us men and for our salvation came down and was incarnate, became man, suffered, and rose again on the third day, as- cended into heaven, and will come to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost." Then follow the anathemas, which not only sever Arius and his followers from the Christian communion, but also serve to elucidate the foregoing Creed. " And those that say there was a time when He was not, and before He was begotten He was not, and that He was made out of nothing, or assert that the Son of God is of another substance or essence, or DigiLizedbyGoOglc THE COUNCIL OF NICEA 227 created, or capable of change or alteration, the Catholic Church anathematizes." Those who objected to the wording of the Creed, found most fault with the term homoousios, consubstantial. This, however, was not so much on account of its meaning, because the phrases, " begotten of the essence of the Father," " Very God of Very God," are substantially synonjonous with it ; but there were extrinsic reasons against its insertion into the Creed that had considerable weight with many of the Eastern bishops. To begin with, it was not a Scriptural term, although the reality for which it stood was clearly enough contained in the Sacred Writings. Worse still, it had been the watchword of the Sabellians, who denied the personal distinction between the Father and the Son, and for that reason the term had been set aside by the Synod of Antioch some sixty years before. However, when it was pointed out that there was no need of defining the faith in Scriptural terms, that the synod of An- tioch had found no fault with the term itself but only with the heterodox sense attached to it by Paul of Samosata, and that it provided a test of orthodoxy which admitted of no subter- fuge on the part of Arian heretics, the majority yielded and consented to its insertion in the Creed. Thereupon the bishops, with the exception of Theonas and Secundus, sub- scribed their names. It is probable, however, that Eusebius of Nicomedia and other friends of Arius would not have done so had it not been for the determined attitude assumed by Constantine, who let it be clearly understood that the decision of the majority should be accepted. Arius, Theonas and Secundus were then banished to lUyricum. Two other disputes were settled by the Council. Meletius of Lycopolis, a rigorist in the matter of penance, had caused a schism at Antioch and greatly disturbed the peace of the Church; for this he was deposed but was allowed to retain the name and title of bishop. Then the paschal dispute, dating from the end of the second century, was amicably ad- justed, the bishop of Antioch and his Eastern colleagues con- senting to conform to the custom prevailing at Alexandria and in the West DigiLizedbyGoOglc 228 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS Finally a number of disciplinary canons, twenty in all, were drawn up of which the following may be mentioned here as throwing some light on the trend of ecclesiastical le^sla- tion: (4) Bishops in each province are to be installed by all their colleagues ; the installation must be confirmed by the metropolitan, (16) No bishop is allowed to receive or pro- mote clerics who have deserted their own church, (5) The bishops of each province are urged to assemble twice a year in council, for the purpose of delivering judgment in cases of a[^peal. (15, 16) Bishops and priests are forbidden to trans- fer themselves from one church to another, (17) The clergy are forbidden to practice usury, (3) They must not keep under their roof any woman who may give cause for suspicion, (8) Novations shall be admitted to communion on their simple promise to accept Catholic dogmas and to hold communion with persons twice married and with apostates who have re- pented. (6, 7) The traditional rights and prerogatives of Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem are confirmed, the posi- tion of the Bishop of Rome as Patriarch in the West being instanced as an example in this matter. The Council was occupied with these various matters during a period of about two months and a half, and then the bishops returned to their several sees. Arianism had been (rfficiaUy condemned, but as subsequent events showed, peace had not been restored to the Church. C — Some Fourth CENTxmv Theologians As doctrinal development in Patristic times proceeded most rapidly during the century which intervened between the Council of Nicaea (325) and that of Ephesus (431), it seems in place here to give a short biographical notice of the theolo- gians who chiefly contributed thereto, and whose names recur again and again in the following chapters. It will enable the reader to follow the trend of events more intelligently, 1°, Eusebius of Casarea in Palestine (256-340). — He was a friend and disciple of Pamphilus, head of the catechetical school at Caesarea, In many respects the most learned man of his age, he was nevertheless but a shallow theologian. DigiLizedbyGoOglc SOME CHAMPIONS OF THE FAITH 229 Moreover his orthodoxy was justly suspected, as he supported Alius, fraternized with the Euse^ians, rejected the homoou- sios, and was opposed to Athanasius. Principal works : Chromcle, Ecclesiastical History, Fraeparatio Evangelica, Demonstratio Evangelica, Contra MarceUum, Ecclesiasttca Theologia. 2. St. Athanasius of Alexandria (295-373}. — Chief oppo- nent of Arianism and " Standard Bearer of Orthodoxy." Of bis early life nothing is known. He was ordained deacon in 319, accompanied his bishop, Alexander, to Nicaea in 325, and was consecrated Patriarch of Alexandria in 328. He was a man of considerable learning, of great holiness of life, and a powerful adversary of the Arians. The latter succeeded in having him banished five times, but he lived to see the decline of their faction. — Principal works : Oratio de Incarnatione Verhi, De Decretis Nicanis, De Synodis, Epistolae IV a Ser- apionem, Vita Venerahilis Patris Nostri Antonii, Festal Let- ters, Contra Arianos. 3°. .5"^ Cyril of Jerusalem ( 31 5-386). —•OrAa\nsA priest in 345, he became bishop of Jerusalem about 350. He was a staunch opponent of Arianism, but, most likely for prudential reasons, he never used the term homoousios. The Arians caused him to be exiled three times, once for eleven years ; but he was reinstated in time to take part in the Council of Con- stantinople in 381. — Principal works: Catecheses, twenty- four in number, which contain an almost complete body of Christian doctrine. 4°. St. Basil of CcEsarea in Cappadocia (331-379)- — First a monk, then a priest (346), and lastly metropolitan of Caesarea (370). Distinguished as an exponent of orthodox teaching, famous as a prelate, and a man of deeds rather than of words, he was even during his life-time styled the Great. He bore a principal part in the work of pacification during the latter years of the Arian struggle. — Principal works: Five books Cot^a Eunomium, De Spiritu Sancto, about twenty-five Homilies on the Hexoemeron and Psalms, three Canonical Letters, Rules for Ascetics, Liturgy. 5°. St. Gregory of Nasiamrus, "the Theologian" (330- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 230 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS 3i>o). — He was an intimate friend of Basil, tc^ether with whom he received his hterary education at Athens. Ordained priest by his own father (361), and consecrated bishop of Sasima by Basil (371), he was transferred to Constantinople in 379- Two years later, whilst the Second General Council was in session there, he resigned that see, and thereafter gov- erned the Church of Nazianzus till his death in 390. Of a somewhat irresolute disposition, he was anything but practical. He is commonly regarded as one of the greatest orators of Christian antiquity. — Principal works : Forty-five Orationes, most of which bear upon the doctrine of the Blessed Trinity. 6°. St. Gregory of Nyssa, brother of St. Basil (334-394). — In 371, he was, much against his inclinations, consecrated bishop of Nyssa, " an insignificant town under the jurisdiction of Basil." Soon after deposed by the Eusefaians, he led a wandering life till 379, when he was reinstated. He was one of the principal theologians at the Council of Constantinople in 381, and is regarded as the mosl diligent and versatile writer of his time. Thwigh an able theologian, he was much more eminent as a philosopher. He cherished great admira- tion for Origen, and to some extent followed his teaching. — Principal works; Catechesis, Twelve Books against Euno- mius. Two Books against Apollinaris. The first named work is an argumentative defense of the principal Christian doc- trines, against Pagans, Jews, and Heretics. y". Didymus the Blind (310-395). — He had lost his sight when four years old, but by prayer, meditation, and close atten- tion to the lectures given in the schools, he acquired extensive and accurate knowledge. For more than half a century he was director of the catechetical school at Alexandria. He was strongly influenced by the teaching of Origen, and fell into some of his errors. In the Fifth General Council (553), he was condemned together with Origen. — Principal works : De Trinitate, De Spiritu Sancto. The latter is considered to be the best treatise on the subject in Christian antiquity. 8°. 5"^. Epiphamus of Salamis (3^5-403). — A Palestinian by birth, and for thirty years superior of a monastery at ^eutheropolis in Judaea, he was in 367 made bishop of DigiLizedbyGoOglc SOME CHAMPIONS OF THE FAITH 231 Salamis (Constantia) in Cyprus. His chief ambition seems to have been to be orthodox in the strictest sense of the term, and a great part of his life was spent in hunting up and re- futing heretics. — Principal works: Ancoratus "the firmly anchored man," an exposition of the doctrine of the Trinity, and particularly of the Holy Ghost; Panarion or Adversus Hareses, a catalogue and exposition of eighty heretical sya* tems. 9". Diodorus of Tarsus in Cilicia (T-390}. — -Belonging to one of the noblest families of Antioch, and singularly talented, he received a finished education in every branch of secular and sacred sciences. At Brst an ascetic and a friend of St Basil, he was made bishop of Tarsus in 378. From 357 to 373, he was the chief supporter of orthodoxy at Antioch ; but over-emphasizing certain tendencies of the Antiochene school, he sowed the seeds of Nestorianism. — Principal works : Commentaries on Sacred Scripture. Only a few fragments of his writings are extant. 10". St. John Chrysostom (344—40/). — He was bom at Antioch of a wealthy family, and received his literary educa- ticHi from the famous rhetorician Libanius. Later on he studied the sacred sciences under Meletius, Patriarch of Anti- och, and Diodorus of Tarsus. For some years he led an ascetical life, but was made priest in 386. After preaching for ten years with great success at Antioch, he was in 397 consecrated Patriarch of Constantinople. Twice banished from his see, he died in exile at Comana in Pontus. Though the first of orators, he holds but a secondary rank as a theo- logian.— Principal works : Most of his writings are Scrip- tural expositions in the form of homilies; 76 on Genesis, 60 on the Psalms, 90 on Matthew, 80 on John, and over 100 on the Epistles of St. Paul. To these must be added his beautiful treatise on the Priesthood, De Sacerdotio in six books; and a number of Catecheses. 11°. St. Amphilochius of Icontum in Lycaonia (340-?}. — He was a cousin of Gregory of Nazianzus. He received a highly finished education under the direction of Libanius, and thereafter practiced law for some years at Constantinople. DigiLizedbyGoOglc 232 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS In 374 he was consecrated bishop of Iconium and became metropolitan of Lycaonia. He was highly esteemed by St. Basil, with whom he effectively cooperated in defending the faith against the Arians. He wrote quite voluminously, but from the sixth century until a few years ago his writings attracted little attention. — Principal works : Of his many literary productions only eight Orationes, a letter Ad Seleu- cum, and some fragments remain. 12°. Theodore of Mopsuestia in CUicia (350-428). — Bom in affluence at Anttoch, he enjoyed the advantages of a liberal education under Libanius, being a fellow student of John Chrysostom. He studied theology under Diodorus of Tarsus, was ordained priest in 383, and then threw himself heart and soul into the defense of orthodoxy against the Arians, Mace- donians, and ApoUinarians. In 392 he was consecrated bishop of Mopsuestia, and for more fiian a third of a century displayed great zeal and energy in the discharge of his pastoral duties. Unfortunately, in his Christological teaching he still further developed the erroneous views of Diodorus, and thus prepared the way for the Nestorian heresy. He was con- demned in the Fifth General Council (553). — Principal works: Commentaries on Sacred Scripture, Contra Euno- mium, a book on the Mysteries, De Assumente et Assumpto. 13°. Aphraates, "the Persian Sage." — Neither the date of his birth nor of his death are known, but he wrote between 336 and 356. He was first a monk, and then bishop of Mar Mathaeus, a Persian monastery East of Mosul. His Christol- ogy is rather undeveloped, but quite orthodox. He frequently touches on the sacrament of penance and the Blessed Eu- charist.— Twenty-three Demonstrationes, or homilies, are the most important of his works that have come down to us. 14°. St. Ephraem Syrvs (306-376). — He was born at Nisibis, and as a young man led the life of a hermit. He was highly esteemed by Bishop Jacob of his native city, whom he is said to have accompanied to the Council of Nicxa. By him he was also made head-master of the school of Nisibis, but when in 363 the city fell into the hands of the Persians, he took up his abode at Edessa. In 370 he traveled to Cap- DigiLizedbyGoOglc SOME CHAMPIONS OF THE FAITH 233 padocia, in order to make the acquaintance of Basil the Great The latter ordained him deacon. His own coimtrymen call him the " Eloquent Mouth," " Prophet of the Syrians," " Doc- tor of the World," " Pillar of the Church," " Lyre of the Holy Ghost." — Principal works: Commentaries on Holy Scrip- ture, Homilies, Sacred Hymns or Chants. The following is a list of the principal Western theologians during the same period of doctrinal development : 1°. Hosius of Cordova in Spain (256-35/). — He was ecclesiastical adviser of Constantine, presided at the Synod of Sardica and probably also at the Council of Nicsea, and has been called the " Father of Councils." It seems to have pri- marily been owing to his exertions that the term homoousios was introduced into the Nicene Creed. What Athanasius was to tiie East that Hosius was to the West, and he has ever been honored as the foremost Western champion of the Catho- lic faith against Arianism, In his extreme old age he was prevailed upon to sign an Arian symbol of faith, but on his deathbed he declared that he had done so against hts will. He labored for the faith almost exclusively by word and deeds ; his writings comprise only a few letters, 2°. St. Hilary of Poitiers (310-366). — He is commonly called the " Athanasius of the West." In the prime of life, he, together with his wife and daughter, embraced the Catholic faith, and shortly after (355) he was consecrated bishop of Poitiers. Banished through the machinations of the Arian bishop Satuminus of Aries (355), he spent four years in Asia Minor, where he became familiar with the Greek language and Eastern theology. After his return to his diocese, he succeeded in stamping out Arianism in Gaul. He may be considered as the first really great theologian of the Latin Church. — Principal works : De Trinitate, De Synodis, Com- mentaries. 3". St. Ambrose of Milan (340-397). — Whilst still a cate- chumen, he was by acclamation chosen bishop of Milan, to succeed the Arian Auxentius (374). He was a man of great practical ability, a staunch defender of ecclesiastical traditions, an eloquent preacher, and an able writer, though not a pro- DigiLizedbyGoOglc 234 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS found theolc^ian. In his many literary productions is notice- able the influence of Eastern writers, whose works he seems to have carefully studied. — Principal works: Besides his many exegetical writings, his De Fide, De Spirttu Sancto, De Mysteriis, De Poenitentia, and De Virginibus, deserve special mention. 4°. St. Jerome (331 or 340-420}. — He was bom of Cath- olic parents at Stridon in Dalmatia, but at the age of twenty he went to Rome, where he was shortly after his arrival bap- tized by Pope Liberius. Somewhat later he journeyed to Treves, to Aquileia, and then to the East, always in search of knowledge. Finally he became a monk, first at Chalcis and then at Bethlehem, where he was ordained priest He was perhaps the most erudite man of his time : well versed in Latin and Greek classics, thoroughly familiar with the Hebrew lan- guage, a renowned exegete, and an able writer. As a the- ologian, however, he does not rank very high, — Principal works: Translation and recension of Holy Scripture, Com- mentaries, translations of many Greek theological works, De Viris IHustribus, Adversus Jovinianum, Contra Vigiiantium, Letters and Homilies. 5". St. Augustine of Hippo in Numidia (354-430). — Among the many great men of the fourth and fifth centuries he was facile princeps, and a grateful posterity has honored him with the title " Doctor Gratiae," As a young man, and whilst still a catechumen, he fell into the heresy of the Mani- chasans, in which he remained for nine years. Whilst sojourn- ing in Italy, he was converted by the prayers of his pious mother and received baptism from St Ambrose (387). After his return to Africa he led for three years a monastic life on his little estate near Tagasta. Then, whilst on a visit to Hippo, he was ordained priest, and three years later (394) was consecrated bishop of the same city. During more than forty years he labored unceasingly to promote the interests of the faith, healing the Donatist schism, vigorously opposing the Pelagian, Semi-Pelagian, and Manichian heresies, in- structing the faithful, and training up a body of model priests. So many of his numerous writings are of paramount im- DigiLizedbyGoOglc SOME CHAMPIONS OF THE FAITH 235 portance that it is impossible to mention them in this place. Regarding the number of his works, he himself tells us, that, leaving aside his letters and discourses, they are " nonaginta tria in libris ducentis triginta duobus," ninety-three in two hundred and thirty-two bot^s. 6°. Besides these great Western writers, there belong to the same period of a number of minor lights who may be mentioned in passing, Phcebadius of Agen in Aquitaine, who died after 392. He is the reputed author of a treatise De Fide Orthodoxa contra Artanos, and also of a Profession of Faith. — St. Pacian of Barcelona in Spain. Sometime between 360 and 390 he wrote three letters to the Novatian Symproni- anus. The first two treat of the Catholic Church, and the third is devoted to the Catholic teaching on Penance. — Marius Victorinus, a famous rhetorician of Rome during the reign of Constantius. In his old age he was converted to Chris- tianity, and wrote three works against the Arians, Adversus Arium, De Ceneratione Divini Verbi, and De Homoousio Recipiendo. From a theological point of view they are of little importance. — Optatus of Mileve in Africa. Between 370 and 385 he wrote a large work in seven books Contra Parmenianum Donatistam. — Nicetas of Remesiana in Dacia. He lived towards the end of the fourth century, and wrote a work for the instruction of candidates for Baptism: Com- petentibus ad Baptismum Instructionis LtbeUos Sex. DigiLizedbyGoOglc CHAPTER XV THE REACTION AFTER NIC^lA: ITS CAUSES: AN OUTUNE OF THE ARIAN CONTROVERSY » " The victory over Arianism achieved at the Council," says Bethune-Baker, " was really a victory snatched by the superior energy and decision of a small minority with the aid of half- hearted allies." ' This statement is a half-truth, and like most half-truths leads to inferences that are entirely devoid of truth. The condemnation of Arianism, as was shown in the preceding chapter, was practically unanimous and spontaneous. There was no half-heartedness about it on the part of the Council. But the positive formulation of the orthodox faith, conceived in the precise terms that were finally chosen, was in a measure " a victory snatched by the superior energy and decision of a small minority with the aid of half-hearted allies." And this was likely enough to cause some sort of reaction after these "half-hearted allies" found themselves free from the influence of stronger minds and the restraint of imperial au- thority. How very real this likelihood was, subsequent events soon showed. A — The Reaction after NiCiEA Hardly had the Council been dissolved when the trouble began. In Egypt the Arians and Meletians caused such a disturbance that a provincial synod had to be summoned ; but it led to no results. In Asia Minor Eusebius of Nicomedia and Theogonis of Niciea openly favored Arianism. They were both sent into banishment, but the ominous mutterings of the Edit Tixeront, H. D. II. 37"^; * Bethunc-Baker, An IntroductioD 336 DigiLizedbyGoOglc ARIAN REACTION AFTER NIC.EA 237 st(»in ccffitinued. Some time later they were recalled, through the influence of Constantia sister of Constantine. Then Arius himself, after making a profession of faith that was conceived in the vaguest terms, was allowed to return. Preparations were even made for his readmission into the Church, but his sudden death frustrated the Emperor's designs. Meanwhile the crafty Eusebius of Nicomedia had wormed himself into the favor of Constantine. and was thereby enabled to strengthen his party in its opposition to the Council. He soon had a large following, known to history as the Eusebians. They were all men whose doctrinal views were undefined and whose training had for the most part been along Subordina- tionist lines. Still afraid to attack the Council openly, he and his party first endeavored to undo the principal champions of orthodoxy. In 330 they succeeded in deposing Eustathius, Patriarch of Antioch, on the charge of Sabellianism. Some- what later they attacked Marcellus of Ancyra, who had written a book De Subjectione Domini, in which Eusebius of Caesarea claimed to find a defense of Adoptionism. At a synod held in Constantinople they brought about his deposition. The person, however, whom they most desired to ruin was Athanasius, who, on the death of Alexander in 328, had been elected Patriarch of Alexandria. He had been present at the Council as deacon of Alexander, and had greatly distinguished himself in showing up the sophistries of Arius. For this he had incurred the undying hatred of the Eusebians. As they could And nothing else against him, they trumped up a political charge and thereby succeeded in having him banished to Treves. Then Constantine died, being baptized on his death- bed by the principal author of all this mischief, Eusebius of Niccanedia. He was succeeded in the East by his son, Con- stantius, a man of no fixed principles, under whom the Eusebi- ans had a free hand. B — Nature and Causes of the Arian Controversy In order to understand the religious confusion that ensued shortly after the death of Constantine, as well as to form DigiLizedbyGoOglc 238 FOURTH CENTURY DEVELOPMENTS a correct judgment of its bearing on orthodox faith, it is very necessary to keep the following facts cleariy in mind. 1°. The disturbance did not affect the whole Church, but was practically confined to Christian communities within the boundaries of the Eastern Empire. In the West only a few localities were affected by the dissension, and most of these but for a short time. 2°. The conflict was not between the Church and Arianism in the strict sense of the term. Real Arians, that is, persons who denied the true divinity of Christ, constituted only a small minority and were violently attacked by all other parties. 3°. The point at issue was the Nicene definition of the Son's relation to the Father as expressed by the term homoou- sios. Hence in the minds of the parties opposed to the Council it was not the true divinity of Christ that was on tcial. Ex- cepting the small Arian contingent, that was in principle accepted and defended by all. 4°. In fact, however, the controversy was not a lis de verbis, a mere quibbling about words ; because the terms substituted for homoousios, such as homoiousios, and homotos, were intended to express a certain subordination and inferiority of the Son to the Father, which must logically and objectively lead to a denial of His divinity, whatever was the view and intention of those by whom they were used. For if the Son is not equal to the Father in His Godhead, He is simply not God ; although He be said to be of a like substance, or simply like the Father. God's substance or essence is absolutely sim- ple and indivisible, and as such admits of no multiplication in individuals of the same species. 5°. At the same time, it must not be overlooked that this leaning towards Subordinationism, on the part of the adver- saries of the Council, was very much accentuated owing to an imperfect and undeveloped terminology. The terms signify- ing substance, essence, person, were used indiscriminately now in the one sense and then in the other. Hence when the homoousi